[Senate Report 107-224]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



                                                       Calendar No. 522
107th Congress                                                   Report
                                 SENATE
 2d Session                                                     107-224
======================================================================
 
 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 
                                  2003
                                _______
                                

                 July 26, 2002.--Ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

          Mrs. Murray, from the Committee on Appropriations, 
                        submitted the following

                              R E P O R T

                         [To accompany S. 2808]

    The Committee on Appropriations reports the bill (S. 2808) 
making appropriations for the Department of Transportation and 
related agencies for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2003, 
and for other purposes, reports favorably thereon and 
recommends that the bill do pass.


Amounts of new budget (obligational) authority for fiscal year 2003

Amount of bill as reported to Senate.................... $22,251,162,000
Amount of budget estimates, 2003........................  20,799,680,000
Fiscal year 2002 enacted................................  18,900,670,000







                            C O N T E N T S

                              ----------                              

                    SUMMARY OF MAJOR RECOMMENDATIONS

                                                                   Page
Total obligational authority.....................................     4
Program, project, and activity...................................     4
Accrual funding of retirement costs and post-retirement health 
  benefits.......................................................     4

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
                        Office of the Secretary

Salaries and expenses............................................     6
Office of Civil Rights...........................................    10
Transportation planning, research, and development...............    11
Transportation Administrative Service Center.....................    12
Essential Air Service and Rural Airport Improvement Fund.........    13
Minority Business Resource Center Program........................    15
Minority business outreach.......................................    16

                 Transportation Security Administration

Summary of fiscal year 2003 program..............................    21

                            U.S. Coast Guard

Operating expenses...............................................    26
Acquisition, construction, and improvements......................    34
Environmental compliance and restoration.........................    37
Alteration of bridges............................................    37
Retired pay......................................................    38
Reserve training.................................................    39
Research, development, test, and evaluation......................    39
Boat safety......................................................    40

                    Federal Aviation Administration

Operations.......................................................    41
Facilities and equipment.........................................    44
Research, engineering, and development...........................    55
Grants-in-aid for airports.......................................    57

                     Federal Highway Administration

Limitation on administrative expenses............................    64
Federal-aid highways.............................................    65
Appalachian development highway system...........................    74
Limitation on Transportation Research............................    75
Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System................    78
Bureau of Transportation Statistics..............................    79
Liquidation of Contract Authorization............................    79

              Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

Motor carrier safety: Limitation on administrative expense.......    80
National motor carrier safety program............................    83
Border enforcement program.......................................    84

             National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

Operations and research..........................................    87
Highway traffic safety grants....................................    93

                    Federal Railroad Administration

Safety and operations............................................    96
Railroad research and development................................    97
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program........    98
Next generation high-speed rail..................................    99
Alaska railroad rehabilitation...................................   100
Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)...   100
    Amtrak Reform Council........................................   106
    Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project...................   106

                     Federal Transit Administration

Administrative expenses..........................................   107
Formula grants...................................................   107
University transportation research...............................   110
Transit planning and research....................................   110
Trust fund share of expenses.....................................   111
Capital investment grants........................................   111
Job access and reverse commute grants............................   143

              St. Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation

Operations and maintenance.......................................   144

              Research and Special Programs Administration

Research and special programs....................................   146
Pipeline safety..................................................   148
Emergency preparedness grants....................................   150

                      Office of Inspector General

Salaries and expenses............................................   150

                      Surface Transportation Board

Salaries and expenses............................................   151

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board: 
  Salaries and expenses..........................................   152
National Transportation Safety Board: Salaries and expenses......   152

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

General provisions...............................................   154
Compliance with paragraph 7, rule XVI, of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   158
Compliance with paragraph 7(c), rule XXVI, of the Standing Rules 
  of the 
  Senate.........................................................   158
Compliance with paragraph 12, rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of 
  the Senate.....................................................   159
Budgetary impact statement.......................................   160











  TOTAL OBLIGATIONAL AUTHORITY PROVIDED--GENERAL FUNDS AND TRUST FUNDS

    In addition to the appropriation of $22,251,162,000 in new 
budget authority for fiscal year 2003, large amounts of 
contract authority are provided by law, the obligation limits 
for which are contained in the annual appropriations bill. The 
principal items in this category are the trust funded programs 
for Federal-aid highways, for mass transit, and for airport 
development grants. For fiscal year 2003, estimated obligation 
limitations and exempt obligations total $42,475,231,000.

                     PROGRAM, PROJECT, AND ACTIVITY

    During fiscal year 2003, for the purposes of the Balanced 
Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 (Public Law 
99-177), as amended, with respect to appropriations contained 
in the accompanying bill, the terms ``program, project, and 
activity'' shall mean any item for which a dollar amount is 
contained in appropriations acts (including joint resolutions 
providing continuing appropriations) or accompanying reports of 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations, or 
accompanying conference reports and joint explanatory 
statements of the committee of conference. This definition 
shall apply to all programs for which new budget (obligational) 
authority is provided, as well as to discretionary grants and 
discretionary grant allocations made through either bill or 
report language. In addition, the percentage reductions made 
pursuant to a sequestration order to funds appropriated for 
facilities and equipment, Federal Aviation Administration, and 
for acquisition, construction, and improvements, Coast Guard, 
shall be applied equally to each budget item that is listed 
under said accounts in the budget justifications submitted to 
the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations as modified 
by subsequent appropriations acts and accompanying committee 
reports, conference reports, or joint explanatory statements of 
the committee of conference.

ACCRUAL FUNDING OF RETIREMENT COSTS AND POST-RETIREMENT HEALTH BENEFITS

    The President's Budget included a legislative proposal 
under the jurisdiction of the Senate Committee on Governmental 
Affairs to charge to individual agencies, starting in fiscal 
year 2003, the fully accrued costs related to retirement 
benefits of Civil Service Retirement System employees and 
retiree health benefits for all civilian employees. The Budget 
also requested an additional dollar amount in each affected 
discretionary account to cover these accrued costs.
    The authorizing committee has not acted on this 
legislation, therefore the Senate Appropriations Committee has 
reduced the dollar amounts of the President's request shown in 
the ``Comparative Statement of New Budget Authority Request and 
Amounts Recommended in the Bill'', as well as in other tables 
in this report, to exclude the accrual funding proposal.
    The Committee further notes that administration proposals 
requiring legislative action by the authorizing committees of 
Congress are customarily submitted in the budget as separate 
schedules apart from the regular appropriations requests. 
Should such a proposal be enacted, a budget amendment formally 
modifying the President's appropriation request for 
discretionary funding is subsequently transmitted to the 
Congress.
    The Senate Appropriations Committee joins with the House 
Appropriations Committee in raising concern that this practice, 
which has always worked effectively for both Congress and past 
administrations, was not followed for the accrual funding 
proposal. In this case, the Office of Management and Budget 
(OMB) decided to include accrual amounts in the original 
discretionary appropriations language request. These amounts 
are based on legislation that has yet to be considered and 
approved by the appropriate committees of Congress. This led to 
numerous misunderstandings both inside and outside of Congress 
of what was the ``true'' President's budget request. The 
Committee believes that, in the future, OMB should follow long-
established procedures with respect to discretionary spending 
proposals that require legislative action.

                 TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

                        OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $67,778,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      92,460,000
Committee recommendation................................      73,069,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $488,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $162,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes $3,640,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals, of which $149,000 is OST 
share of TASC accruals.

    Section 3 of the Department of Transportation Act of 
October 15, 1966 (Public Law 89-670) provides for establishment 
of the Office of the Secretary of Transportation [OST]. The 
Office of the Secretary is composed of the Secretary and the 
Deputy Secretary immediate offices, the Office of the General 
Counsel, and five assistant secretarial offices for 
transportation policy, aviation and international affairs, 
budget and programs, governmental affairs, and administration. 
These secretarial offices have policy development and central 
supervisory and coordinating functions related to the overall 
planning and direction of the Department of Transportation, 
including staff assistance and general management supervision 
of the counterpart offices in the operating administrations of 
the Department.
    The Committee recommends a total of $73,069,000 for the 
Office of the Secretary of Transportation including $60,000 for 
reception and representation expenses.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:

                        (In thousands of dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                              ---------------------------    Committee
                                   2002         2003      recommendation
                               enacted \1\  estimate \2\
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Immediate Office of the        ...........         4,411  ..............
 Secretary and Deputy
 Secretary...................
Immediate Office of the              1,929  ............          2,034
 Secretary...................
Immediate Office of the                619  ............            619
 Deputy Secretary............
Office of the Executive              1,204  ............          1,204
 Secretariat.................
Board of Contract Appeals....          507           611            507
Office of Small and                  1,240         1,304          1,304
 Disadvantaged Business
 Utilization.................
Office of Intelligence and           1,321  ............  ..............
 Security....................
Office of the Chief                  5,991        15,987         10,991
 Information Officer.........
Office of the Assistant              2,282         2,453          2,282
 Secretary for Governmental
 Affairs.....................
Office of the General Counsel       13,275        15,657         13,828
Office of the Under Secretary  ...........        12,453  ..............
 for Transportation Policy...
Office of the Assistant              7,421  ............          7,471
 Secretary for Aviation and
 International Affairs.......
Office of the Assistant              3,058  ............          3,058
 Secretary for Transportation
 Policy......................
Office of the Assistant              7,668         8,375          7,668
 Secretary for Budget and
 Programs....................
Office of the Assistant             18,890        29,285         20,380
 Secretary for Administration
Assistant to the Secretary           1,723         1,926          1,723
 and Director of Public
 Affairs.....................
                              ------------------------------------------
      Total..................       67,128        92,460         73,069
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects reduction of $650,000 pursuant to section 349 of Public Law
  107-87 and section 1106 of Public Law 107-117..
\2\ Excludes $3,640,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

                   IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

    The Committee recommends $2,034,000 for fiscal year 2003 
for the Immediate Office of the Secretary. The Immediate Office 
of the Secretary has the primary responsibility to provide 
overall planning, direction, and control of the Department. The 
additional funding made available for this office above the 
comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level is intended to 
address slightly more than half of the increased travel funds 
sought by the Secretary.

                IMMEDIATE OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY SECRETARY

    The Committee has recommended a total of $619,000 for the 
Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary which has the primary 
responsibility of assisting the Secretary in the overall 
planning and direction of the Department. The amount provided 
is the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated 
level.

                     OFFICE OF THE GENERAL COUNSEL

    The Committee recommends $13,828,000 for fiscal year 2003 
for the Office of the General Counsel. The Office of the 
General Counsel provides legal services to the Office of the 
Secretary including the conduct of aviation regulatory 
proceedings and aviation consumer activities and coordinates 
and reviews the legal work in the chief counsels' offices of 
the operating administrations. The General Counsel is the chief 
legal officer of the Department of Transportation and the final 
authority within the Department on all legal questions. The 
Committee approves the agency's request for an increase of 
$553,000 to be used for the Department's ``Accessibility for 
All America'' initiative. These resources will assist the 
Department in carrying out the requirements in the Air Carrier 
Access Act of 1986 (ACAA) and Section 707 of the Wendell H. 
Ford Aviation Investment and Reform Act for the 21st Century 
(AIR-21). This is the only adjustment provided above the 
comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.

              OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR POLICY

    For fiscal year 2003, the Committee provides $3,058,000 for 
the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy which is the 
primary policy office of the Department and is responsible to 
the Secretary for analysis, development, articulation, and 
review of policies and plans for domestic transportation. The 
amount provided is the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 
appropriated level.
    Tier Matching Based on Fiscal Capability.--At present, 
Federal grant programs administered by the Federal Highway 
Administration, Federal Aviation Administration, and Federal 
Transit Administration require an identical match of all 
communities without regard to their financial circumstances. 
Some have asserted that this policy places a disproportionate 
burden on lower-income jurisdictions and prevents these 
jurisdictions from fully participating in the very programs 
necessary to improve conditions. The Committee takes no 
position on this assertion. However, for the purpose of 
information gathering, the Committee separately requests the 
FHWA, FAA, and FTA to each provide reports, covering the 
programs within each administration, to the Committee by March 
15, 2003 which address this contention. Should the agencies 
believe that contention has merit, they may as part of these 
reports, propose a tiered matching system for non-Federal 
contributions based upon the fiscal capability of the grantee 
and which does not increase, over the existing grant programs, 
each program's cumulative financial burden on each 
administration.

   OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR AVIATION AND INTERNATIONAL 
                                AFFAIRS

    The Committee recommends $7,471,000 for the Assistant 
Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs which is 
responsible for administering the economic regulatory functions 
regarding the airline industry. In addition, the Assistant 
Secretary provides departmental leadership and coordination on 
international transportation policy issues relating to 
maritime, trade, technical assistance, and cooperation 
programs. As overseer of airline economic regulation, the 
Assistant Secretary is responsible for international aviation 
programs, the essential air service program, airline fitness 
and licensing, acquisitions, international route awards, and 
special investigations such as airline delays and computer 
reservations systems (CRS). The amount provided is $50,000 more 
than the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level. This 
increased amount is intended to cover some of the increased 
travel costs associated with international aviation 
negotiations.

       OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR BUDGET AND PROGRAMS

    The Committee recommends a total of $7,668,000 for the 
Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs. The 
amount provided is the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 
appropriated level. The Assistant Secretary for Budget and 
Programs is the principal staff advisor to the Secretary on the 
development, review, presentation, and execution of the 
Department's budget resource requirements, and on the 
evaluation and oversight of the Department's programs. The 
primary responsibilities of this office are to ensure the 
effective preparation and presentation of sound and adequate 
budget estimates for the Department, to ensure the consistency 
of the Department's budget execution with the action and advice 
of the Congress and the Office of Management and Budget, to 
evaluate the program proposals for consistency with the 
Secretary's stated objectives, and to advise the Secretary of 
program and legislative changes necessary to improve program 
effectiveness.
    The Committee directs the Office of the Secretary to report 
monthly on the status of all outstanding reports and reporting 
requirements, including how delinquent congressionally mandated 
or requested reports are and an estimated date for delivery. 
The Committee expects that the Department will constitute this 
responsibility in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Budget and Programs.

       OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

    The Committee recommends $2,282,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs which advises the 
Secretary on all congressional and intergovernmental activities 
and on all departmental legislative initiatives and other 
relationships with Members of Congress. The amount provided is 
the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level. 
The Assistant Secretary promotes effective communication with 
other Federal agencies and regional Department officials, and 
with State and local governments and national organizations for 
development of departmental programs; and ensures that consumer 
preferences, awareness, and needs are brought into the 
decision-making process.

          OFFICE OF THE ASSISTANT SECRETARY FOR ADMINISTRATION

    The Committee recommends $20,380,000 for the Office of the 
Assistant Secretary for Administration which includes the 
Office of the Secretary portion of rent. The Assistant 
Secretary for Administration is responsible for establishing 
policies and procedures, setting guidelines, working with the 
Operating Administrations to improve the effectiveness and 
efficiency of the Department in human resource management, 
security and administrative management, real and personal 
property management, and acquisition and grants management. The 
amount provided above the comparable fiscal year 2002 
appropriated level is intended to compensate for some or all of 
the following requested adjustments:

Increased security investigations.......................        +$40,000
Protection services for the Secretary...................        +150,000
HQ building security barriers...........................        +300,000
OST's cost to TASC......................................      +1,000,000

    The Committee has deferred consideration of the requests 
for secure video conferencing equipment until the issues 
surrounding the creation of a new Department of Homeland 
Security are resolved. The Committee has not provided funding 
for a security survey for the new headquarters building since 
funding is not provided for the new headquarters building.

                        OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS

    The Committee recommends $1,723,000 for the Office of 
Public Affairs which is the principal advisor to the Secretary 
and other senior departmental officials and news media on 
public affairs questions. The Office issues news releases, 
articles, fact sheets, briefing materials, publications, and 
audiovisual materials. It also provides information to the 
Secretary on opinions and reactions of the public and news 
media on transportation programs and issues. The amount 
provided is the same as the comparable fiscal year 2002 
appropriated level.

                         EXECUTIVE SECRETARIAT

    The Committee recommends an appropriation of $1,204,000 for 
the expenses of the Executive Secretariat. The Executive 
Secretariat assists the Secretary and Deputy Secretary in 
carrying out their management functions and responsibilities by 
controlling and coordinating internal and external written 
materials. The amount provided is the same as the comparable 
fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.

                       BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

    The primary responsibility of the Board of Contract Appeals 
is to provide an independent forum for the trial and 
adjudication of all claims by, or against, a contractor 
relating to a contract of any element of the Department, as 
mandated by the Contract Disputes Act of 1978, 41 U.S.C. 601. 
The Committee has provided $507,000 for the Board of Contract 
Appeals Board. The amount provided is the same as the 
comparable fiscal year 2002 appropriated level.

         OFFICE OF SMALL AND DISADVANTAGED BUSINESS UTILIZATION

    The Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
has primary responsibility for providing policy direction for 
small and disadvantaged business participation in the 
Department's procurement and grant programs, and effective 
execution of the functions and duties under sections 8 and 15 
of the Small Business Act, as amended. The Committee recommends 
$1,304,000, the full amount requested.

                OFFICE OF THE CHIEF INFORMATION OFFICER

    The Committee recommends $10,991,000 for the Office of the 
Chief Information Officer which serves as the principal adviser 
to the Secretary on matters involving information resources and 
information systems management. The amount provided is 
$5,000,000 more than the comparable fiscal year 2002 
appropriated level.
    The CIO provides leadership for a large information 
technology program to ensure that the right investments are 
made and that technology resources are secure and accessible.

                        OFFICE OF INTERMODALISM

    The Committee recommends $1,261,000 for the Office of 
Intermodalism to be funded within the Federal Highway 
Administration's limitation on administrative expenses. The 
Committee does not recommend funding for the Office of 
Intermodalism in the Office of the Secretary accounts.

                         Office of Civil Rights

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................      $8,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................       8,700,000
Committee recommendation................................       8,700,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $60,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $70,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117..
\2\ Excludes $470,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    The Office of Civil Rights is responsible for advising the 
Secretary on civil rights and equal employment opportunity 
matters, formulating civil rights policies and procedures for 
the operating administrations, investigating claims that small 
businesses were denied certification or improperly certified as 
disadvantaged business enterprises, and overseeing the 
Department's conduct of its civil rights responsibilities and 
making final determinations on civil rights complaints. In 
addition, the Civil Rights Office is responsible for enforcing 
laws and regulations which prohibit discrimination in federally 
operated and federally assisted transportation programs. The 
Committee has provided a funding level of $8,700,000 for the 
Office of Civil Rights, the full amount requested.

                       New Headquarters Building

Appropriations, 2002....................................................
Budget estimate, 2003...................................     $25,000,000
Committee recommendation................................................

    The administration requested $25,000,000 for the new 
Department of Transportation headquarters project to 
consolidate all of the department's headquarters operating 
administration functions (except FAA and the United States 
Coast Guard), from various locations into a state-of-the-art 
efficient leased buildings within the central employment area 
of the District of Columbia.
    The Committee believes that providing funding for this 
building is premature at this time, given the uncertainty 
surrounding the possible transfer of certain DOT functions to a 
new Department of Homeland Security and the extraordinary 
investments that the Transportation Security Administration has 
already made in the existing DOT building.

           Transportation Planning, Research, and Development

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $11,993,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      10,700,000
Committee recommendation................................      21,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $87,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $313,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes $135,000 for CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    The Office of the Secretary performs those research 
activities and studies which can more effectively or 
appropriately be conducted at the departmental level. This 
research effort supports the planning, research and development 
activities, needed to assist the Secretary in the formulation 
of national transportation policies. The program is carried out 
primarily through contracts with other Federal agencies, 
educational institutions, nonprofit research organizations, and 
private firms. The Committee recommends $21,000,000 for 
transportation planning, research, and development, $9,007,000 
more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and $10,300,000 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
more than the President's budget request.

        Project Name                                              Amount

Bypass Mail System Computer Software & Hardware 
    Upgrades, AK........................................        $500,000
Circumpolar Infrastructure Task Force, Arctic Council & 
    Northern Forum, AK..................................         500,000
Delaware Memorial Bridge Collision Avoidance Project, DE       1,000,000
DOT's Privacy Practies Third Party Evaluation...........       1,000,000
Northeast Advanced Vehicle Consortium Fuel Cell, CT.....       2,000,000
Office for Infrastructure Transp. & Logistics, AL.......       1,000,000
Strategic Freight Transportation Analysis, WA...........       1,500,000
UAL Fuel Cell/Hybrid Electric Research Program, AL......       1,000,000
WestStart's Vehicular Flywheel Project, WA..............       1,500,000

              Transportation Administrative Service Center

Limitation, 2002 \1\ \2\................................    $125,323,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \3\...............................     131,779,000
Committee recommendation................................     131,779,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $5,000,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $4,300,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Does not reflect $12,100,000 additional obligation limitation 
pursuant to H.R. 4775.
\3\ Proposed without limitations. Includes DOT only.

    The Transportation Administrative Service Center [TASC] 
provides a business operation fund for DOT to provide a wide 
range of administrative services to the Department and other 
customers. Services are financed through customer 
reimbursements. During the budget formulation phase TASC 
provides customers with estimates based on historical usage, 
adjusted for new or changed requirements. TASC is also 
responsive to newly emerging customer requirements that may be 
identified as the program is executed. Customer estimates are 
updated mid-year during the execution phase to provide 
customers with more current information. TASC services are 
delivered to customers through an organizational structure of 
individual business practices providing related services or 
products. This arrangement allows TASC to achieve economies of 
scale, resulting in savings for TASC customers. TASC customers 
also benefit from expertise developed in service areas that are 
used in the Federal sector, such as transit benefit 
distribution and technology acquisition. TASC operates under a 
full cost recovery concept, which incorporates distribution of 
overhead and indirect cost. TASC services include:
  --Functions formerly in DOT's working capital fund [WCF];
  --Office of the Secretary [OST] personnel, procurement and 
        information technology support operations;
  --Systems development staff;
  --Operations of the consolidated departmental dockets 
        facilities; and
  --Certain departmental services and administrative 
        operations, such as human resources management 
        programs, transit fare subsidy payments, and employee 
        wellness including substance awareness and testing.

         Small Community Air Service Development Pilot Program

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000

    The Committee bill includes $20,000,000, within funds 
provided for FAA's airport improvement program, for the Small 
Community Air Service Development Pilot Program authorized by 
section 203 of the Wendell H. Ford Aviation Investment and 
Reform Act for the 21st Century. The program is designed to 
improve air service to underutilized airports in small and 
rural communities. The total number of communities or groups of 
communities that can participate in the program is limited to 
no more than 4 from any one State and no more than 40 overall. 
The program gives priority to communities that have high air 
fares, will contribute a local share of the cost, will 
establish a public-private partnership to facilitate airline 
service, and where assistance will provide benefits to a broad 
segment of the traveling public.

        Essential Air Service and Rural Airport Improvement Fund


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                   Approriations   Mandatory \3\   AIP transfer        Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\........................  \2\ $13,000,00     $50,000,000  ..............     $63,000,000
                                                               0
Budget estimate, 2003...........................  ..............      30,000,000     $83,000,000     113,000,000
Committee recommendation........................      65,000,000      50,000,000  ..............     115,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include $50,000,000 from payments to Air Carriers (A&ATF) provided in the Emergency Supplemental
  Act, 2002, Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Payments to Air Carriers (Airport and Airway Trust Fund).
\3\ From overflight fees.

    The Essential Air Service [EAS] and Rural Airport 
Improvement Program provides funds directly to commuter/
regional airlines to provide air service to small communities 
that otherwise would not receive air service and for rural 
airport improvement as provided by the 1996 Federal Aviation 
Reauthorization Act.
    The Federal Aviation Reauthorization Act of 1996 authorizes 
user fees for flights that fly over, but do not land in, the 
United States. The first $50,000,000 of each year's fees were 
to go directly to carry out the Essential Air Service Program 
and, to the extent not used for essential air service, to 
improve rural airport safety. If $50,000,000 in fees is not 
available, than the funds must be made available from 
appropriations otherwise made available to the FAA 
Administrator.
    For fiscal year 2003, the Administration has proposed to 
transfer $83,000,000 from the grants-in-aid for airports 
program (AIP) for the costs of the EAS program. The Committee 
has rejected this request as it would strip almost the entire 
amount of increased funds available in fiscal year 2003 for 
investments in airport capacity and safety projects. The 
Administration is also proposing bill language to allow the 
Secretary to take whatever actions are necessary to keep the 
2003 program within the proposed $113,000,000. The budget also 
proposed capping the per passenger subsidy at $275 for points 
greater than 210 miles, with the exception of service to 
communities in Alaska. The Committee does not concur in either 
of the Administration's proposals and has instead provided 
adequate sums to provide service to all current and likely 
eligible points. The Committee notes that there is anticipated 
to be an estimated $13,000,000 in carryover funds brought 
forward from fiscal year 2002 to fiscal year 2003. Together 
with these resources, program funding under the Committee 
recommendation should equal $128,000,000 in fiscal year 2003.
    The following table reflects the points currently receiving 
service and the annual rates as of February 1, 2002 in the 
continental United States and Hawaii.

                                    EAS SUBSIDY RATES AS OF FEBRUARY 1, 2002
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                               Average daily
                                              enplanements at                                         Total
                                              EAS point (year   Annual subsidy    Subsidy per       passengers
             States/communities                    ending      rates (February     passenger       (year ending
                                               September 30,       1, 2002)                       September 30,
                                                   2001)                                              2001)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ALABAMA: Muscle Shoals......................             22.5       $1,073,257           $76.05           14,113
ARIZONA:
    Kingman.................................              5.1          541,502           170.87            3,169
    Page....................................          ( \1\ )        1,251,977  ...............  ...............
    Prescott................................             14.0          541,502            61.80             8762
    Show Low................................          ( \1\ )          410,080  ...............  ...............
ARKANSAS:
    El Dorado/Camden........................              4.1          825,569           317.89            2,597
    Harrison................................              8.6        1,125,591           208.06            5,410
    Hot Springs.............................              8.4        1,125,591           214.77            5,241
    Jonesboro...............................              7.7          825,569           170.85            4,832
CALIFORNIA:
    Crescent City...........................             43.5          314,865            11.57           27,205
    Merced..................................             13.3          949,458           113.99            8,329
COLORADO:
    Alamosa.................................             14.7          925,045           100.29            9,224
    Cortez..................................             28.8          403,311            22.35           18,044
    Pueblo..................................              8.8          527,185            95.83            5,501
HAWAII:
    Hana....................................             12.2          574,500            75.36            7,623
    Kamuela.................................              6.0          424,559           112.62            3,770
    Kalaupapa...............................              5.2          272,807            83.45            3,269
ILLINOIS: Marion/Herrin.....................             36.1          794,031            35.11           22,618
IOWA: Burlington............................             39.2          929,082            37.85           24,547
KANSAS:
    Dodge City..............................             13.5          564,422            66.86            8,442
    Garden City.............................             32.2          897,960            44.58           20,141
    Great Bend..............................              3.9          216,074            87.98            2,456
    Hays....................................             24.8        1,152,945            74.18           15,543
    LIberal/Guymon..........................             10.5        1,083,289           165.14            6,560
    Topeka..................................              6.2          621,872           161.07            3,861
KENTUCKY: Owensboro.........................             21.5          888,863            66.03           13,461
MAINE:
    Augusta/Waterville......................             13.7          634,145            73.76            8,597
    Bar Harbor..............................             40.8          634,145            24.82           25,545
    Presque Isle............................             59.6        1,082,408            29.03           37,284
    Rockland................................             23.4          634,145            43.38           14,620
MICHIGAN:
    Iron/Ashland............................              6.5          544,269           134.49            4,047
    Iron Mountain/Kingsford.................             28.6          473,599            26.41           17,933
    Manistee................................              4.4          542,168           197.15            2,750
MISSOURI:
    Cape Girardeau..........................             22.3          430,925            30.87           13,958
    Fort Leonard Wood.......................             27.1          573,725            33.79           16,979
    Kirksville..............................              6.3          732,363           186.59            3,925
MONTANA:
    Glasgow.................................              7.0          707,462           160.60            4,405
    Glendive................................              3.1          707,462           367.13            1,927
    Havre...................................              3.7          707,462           308.13            2,296
    Lewistown...............................              2.8          707,462           398.35            1,776
    Miles City..............................              3.9          707,462           291.38            2,428
    Sidney..................................              8.6          707,462           131.89            5,364
    Wolf Point..............................              5.8          707,462           193.35            3,659
NEBRASKA:
    Alliance................................              2.8          785,175           449.96            1,745
    Chadron.................................              5.1          785,175           244.83            3,207
    Kearney.................................             25.0          839,487            53.71           15,629
    McCook..................................              7.6        1,325,289           279.48            4,742
    Norfolk.................................              4.8          531,735           175.78            3,025
    North Platte............................             24.1          106,006             7.04           15,056
NEVADA: Ely.................................               /1          976,533
NEW MEXICO:
    Alamogordo/Holloman.....................              6.2          923,789           238.40            3,875
    Clovis..................................              8.8        1,118,197           202.28            5,528
    Gallup..................................              3.2          691,080           347.10            1,991
    Silver City/Hurley/Deming...............              8.3          935,667           179.69            5,207
NEW YORK:
    Massena.................................              9.0          371,835            65.87            5,645
    Ogdensburg..............................              7.6          371,835            77.72            4,784
    Saranac Lake............................              9.1          631,353           111.06            5,685
    Utica...................................              3.7        1,133,415           495.59            2,287
    Watertown...............................             10.7          371,835            55.33            6,720
NORTH DAKOTA:
    Devils Lake.............................              8.5          793,867           149.17            5,322
    Dickinson...............................             12.6          590,153            74.86            7,883
    Jamestown...............................              9.4          793,867           134.30            5,911
OKLAHOMA:
    Enid....................................             12.1          972,122           128.15            7,586
    Ponca City..............................             11.7          972,122           132.23            7,352
PENNSYLVANIA: Oil City/Franklin.............             15.2          510,261            53.49            9,540
PUERTO RICO: Ponce..........................             19.8          337,551            27.28           12,372
SOUTH DAKOTA:
    Brookings...............................              3.4          849,386           397.09            2,139
    Huron...................................              5.8          394,585           109.58            3,601
TENNESSEE: Jackson..........................             25.3        1,151,993            72.68           15,850
TEXAS: Brownwood............................              6.8          865,886           202.88            4,268
UTAH:
    Cedar City..............................             30.3          679,450            35.80           18,978
    Moab....................................               /1          971,444
    Vernal..................................          ( \1\ )        1,102,967  ...............  ...............
VERMONT: Rutland............................              9.8          634,145           102.98            6,158
WASHINGTON: Ephrata/Moses Lake..............             32.7          479,859            23.48           20,439
WEST VIRGINIA:
    Beckley.................................              9.0          857,530           152.07            5,639
    Princeton/Bluefield.....................              7.5          857,530           181.64            4,721
WISCONSIN: Oshkosh..........................              8.7          460,392            84.86            5,425
WYOMING:
    Laramie.................................             33.8          297,633            14.07           21,149
    Rock Springs............................             31.3          465,023            23.72           19,605
    Worland.................................              9.5          353,345            59.73            5,916
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Less than full year data.

               Minority Business Resource Center Program

Appropriations, 2002....................................        $900,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................         900,000
Committee recommendation................................         900,000

    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization 
[OSDBU]/Minority Business Resource Center [MBRC].--The OSDBU/
MBRC provides assistance in obtaining short-term working 
capital and bonding for disadvantaged, minority, and women-
owned businesses [DBE/MBE/WBE's]. In fiscal year 2001, the 
short-term lending program was converted from a direct loan 
program to a guaranteed loan program. In fiscal year 2003, the 
program will continue to focus on providing working capital to 
DBE/MBE/WBE's for transportation-related projects in order to 
strengthen their competitive and productive capabilities.
    Since fiscal year 1993, the short-term lending program has 
been a separate line item appropriation, which segregated such 
activities in response to changes made by the Federal Credit 
Reform Act of 1990. The limitation on guaranteed loans under 
the Minority Business Resource Center is at the 
administration's requested level of $18,367,000.
    Of the funds appropriated, $500,000 covers the subsidy 
costs; and, $400,000 is for administrative expenses to carry 
out the Guaranteed Loan Program.

                       Minority Business Outreach

Appropriations, 2002....................................      $3,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................       3,000,000
Committee recommendation................................       3,000,000

    This appropriation provides contractual support to assist 
small, women-owned, Native American, and other disadvantaged 
business firms in securing contracts and subcontracts arising 
out of projects that involve Federal spending. It also provides 
support to historically black and Hispanic colleges. Separate 
funding is requested by the administration since this program 
provides grants and contract assistance that serves DOT-wide 
goals and not just OST purposes.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Rebates, refunds, and incentive payments.--The Department 
receives funds from various Government programs at different 
time intervals (that is, weekly, monthly, quarterly). For 
example, under the General Services Administration's Travel 
Management Center [TMC] Program, rebate checks received from 
the travel contractor are distributed monthly to each element 
of the Department in proportion to net domestic airline sales 
arranged by the contractor. Past expenditures have to be 
analyzed to determine the proper sources to refund which can be 
a time-consuming process. The staff time and cost associated 
with the precise accounting for each such refund is 
prohibitive. To alleviate the need to specifically identify the 
source for each repayment the Committee has included language 
(sec. 326), as requested, that allows a fair and sensible 
allocation of the rebates and miscellaneous other funds.

                                                             CHANGES IN FISCAL YEAR 2002 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION APPROPRIATIONS
                                                                                    (In thousands of dollars)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                 Public Law 107-87 DOT Appropriations Act                          Public Law 107-117 Emergency
                                                         ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------              Supp.                    Net
                                                           Approprations                                  Sec. 329                               --------------------------------  appropriation
                         Account                                and        Sec. 349 TASC    Sec. 318       Amtrak       Sec. 330      Sec. 350                                    and obligation
                                                            obligations      reduction      recession      Reform     Misc. hwy GF     Border     Sec. 1106 TASC    Chapter 11      limitation
                                                            limitation                                     Council      projects      Crossing       reduction
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office of the Secretary:
    Salaries and expenses...............................         67,778            -488   ............  ............  ............          -162  ..............  ..............         67,128
    Transportation planning, research, and developme....         11,993             -87   ............  ............  ............  ............           -313   ..............         11,593
    Minority business resources center..................            900   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............            900
    Minority business outreach..........................          3,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          3,000
    Office of civil rights..............................          8,500             -60   ............  ............  ............  ............            -70   ..............          8,370
    Essential air service/payments to air carriers......         13,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        [50,000]         63,000
    Essential air service (transfer of fees from FAA....        [50,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        [50,000]
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        105,171            -635   ............  ............  ............  ............           -545          50,000         153,991
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Transportation Security Administration:
    Transportation Security Administration \1\..........  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         94,800          94,800
    Transportation Security Administration (fees).......     [1,250,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............     [1,250,000]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
U.S. Coast Guard:
    Operating Expenses..................................      3,382,000            -791   ............  ............  ............  ............           -680         209,150       3,589,679
    Acquisition, construction, and improvements.........        636,354            -158   ............  ............  ............  ............           -136   ..............        636,060
    Environmental compliance and restoration............         16,927              -5   ............  ............  ............  ............             -4   ..............         16,918
    Alteration of bridges...............................         15,466   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         15,466
    Retired pay.........................................        876,346   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        876,346
    Reserve training....................................         83,194             -22   ............  ............  ............  ............            -19   ..............         83,153
    Research, development, test, and evaluation.........         20,222              -3   ............  ............  ............  ............             -3   ..............         20,216
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................      5,030,509            -979   ............  ............  ............  ............           -842         209,150       5,237,838
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Aviation Administration:
    Operations..........................................      6,886,000          -1,516   ............  ............  ............  ............         -1,304         200,000       7,083,180
    Facilities and equipment............................      2,914,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        108,500       3,022,500
    Facilities and equipment, rescission of py BA.......        -15,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        -15,000
    Research, engineering, and development..............        195,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         50,000         245,000
    Grants-in-aid for airports (obligation limitatio....      3,300,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............      3,300,000
    Grants-in-aid for airports (rescission of contra....       -301,720   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............       -301,720
    Grants-in-aid for airports (TF appropriations)......  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        175,000         175,000
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
      Subtotal..........................................     12,978,280          -1,516   ............  ............  ............  ............         -1,304         533,500      13,508,960
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Highway Administration:
    Limitation on administrative expenses...............       [311,000]          [-452]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-389]  ..............       [310,159]
    Federal-aid highways (obligation limitation) \2\....     31,799,104   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............     31,799,104
    Emergency relief (CA)...............................       [100,000]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............       [100,000]
    Emergency relief (TF approp)........................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         75,000          75,000
    Exempt obligations..................................        965,308   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        965,308
    Appalachian Development Highway System..............        200,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        200,000
    State infrastructure banks, rescission of py BA.....         -5,750   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         -5,750
    Miscellaneous appropriations (GF)...................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............       144,000  ............  ..............          4,300         148,300
    Miscellaneous highway projects (TF).................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000         100,000
    Value Pricing and TIFIA, rescission of CA...........        -52,973   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        -52,973
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................     32,905,689           [-452]  ............  ............       144,000  ............          [-389]        179,300      33,228,989
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration:
    National motor carrier safety program (obligation)..        205,896   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        205,896
    Motor carrier safety (limitation on administrati....        110,000             -85   ............  ............  ............  ............            -73   ..............        109,842
    Border Enforcement (TF).............................  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............        25,866  ..............  ..............         25,866
    Limitation on admin. expenses, rescission of CA.....         -6,665   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         -6,665
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        309,231             -85   ............  ............  ............        25,866            -73   ..............        334,939
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration:
    Operations and Research, General Fund...............        127,780            -536   ............  ............  ............  ............           -461   ..............        126,783
    Operations and Research, Trust Fund (obligation.....         72,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         72,000
    National driver registration........................          2,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          2,000
    Highway safety grants...............................        223,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        223,000
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        424,780            -536   ............  ............  ............  ............           -461   ..............        423,783
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Railroad Administration:
    Safety and operations...............................        110,857            -175   ............  ............  ............  ............           -150           6,000         116,532
    Research and development............................         29,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         29,000
    Next generation high speed rail.....................         32,300   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         32,300
    Alaska railroad rehabilitation......................         20,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         20,000
    Grants to Nat'l RR Passenger Corp...................        521,476   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000         621,476
    Pennsylania Station redevelopment...................         20,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         20,000
    Amtrak reform council...............................  ..............  ..............  ............           225  ............  ............  ..............  ..............            225
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        733,633            -175   ............           225  ............  ............           -150         106,000         839,533
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Federal Transit Administration:
    Administrative expenses (approps and oblig limit....         67,000           [-208]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-179]  ..............         67,000
    Formula grants (approps and oblig limitation) \3\...      3,542,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............         23,500       3,565,500
    Univ. transporation research (approps and oblig.....          6,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............          6,000
    Transit planning and research (approps and oblig....        116,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        116,000
    Capital investment grants (approps and oblig lim....      2,891,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............        100,000       2,991,000
    Capital investment grants (Trust Fund approps)......  ..............  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............  ..............
    Job access (approps and oblig limitation)...........        125,000   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............        125,000
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................      6,747,000           [-208]  ............  ............  ............  ............          [-179]        123,500       6,870,500
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corp:
    Operations and maintenance..........................         13,345             -11   ............  ............  ............  ............            -10   ..............         13,324
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Research and Special Programs Administration:
    Research and special programs.......................         37,279            -113   ............  ............  ............  ............            -97           2,500          39,569
    Pipeline safety.....................................         58,250             -74   ............  ............  ............  ............            -64   ..............         58,112
    Emergency preparedness grants.......................         14,300   ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............         14,300
                                                         ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal..........................................        109,829            -187   ............  ............  ............  ............           -161           2,500         111,981
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Bureau of Transportation Statistics \4\.................        [31,000]          [-103]  ............  ............  ............  ............           [-89]  ..............        [30,808]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Office of the Inspector General: Salaries and expenses           50,614            -108   ............  ............  ............  ............            -93           1,300          51,713
 \5\....................................................
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
Surface Transportation Board:
    Salaries and expenses...............................         18,457              -5   ............  ............  ............  ............             -4   ..............         18,448
    Salaries and expenses (fees)........................           [950]  ..............  ............  ............  ............  ............  ..............  ..............           [950]
                                                         =======================================================================================================================================
      Total, Department of Transportation (excluding         59,426,538          -4,237   ............           225       144,000        25,866         -3,643       1,300,050      60,888,799
       Maritime Administration).........................
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include reallocation of Public Law 107-38 funds of $760 million from FEMA to TSA.
\2\ Net of transfer of RABA to FMCSA.
\3\ Reflects $50 million BA transfer from formula grants to capital discretionary.
\4\ BTS funding included within Federal-aid highways.
\5\ Does not include $5.5 million reimbursable from FHWA and FTA.

                 TRANSPORTATION SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


                  SUMMARY OF FISCAL YEAR 2003 PROGRAM

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Offsetting
                                        Appropriation      Collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\........    $1,250,000,000    $1,250,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...............     4,800,000,000     2,347,000,000
Committee recommendation............     4,950,000,000     2,347,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include: (1) an additional $780,000,000 in supplemental
  funding provided to FAA for, among other things, security within the
  aircraft, explosives detection systems, and designated pilot and
  demonstration projects; (2) $298,000,000 in appropriated funding
  provided to FAA for functions now performed by TSA, including the
  transfer of the Civil Aviation Security organization, research and
  development, and explosives detection systems; and, (3) $93,000,000
  provided for port security grants.
\2\ Does not $2.85,000,000,000 in fiscal year 2002 to support TSA
  operations.

    The Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was 
established on November 19, 2001, with the enactment of the 
Aviation and Transportation Security Act (Act) into law. The 
Act created TSA within the Department of Transportation and 
identified a series of objectives and authorities under which 
TSA would improve security across all modes of transportation 
for the American public. As called for in the Act, TSA is 
charged with ensuring security across the U.S. transportation 
system. TSA's mission is to protect the Nation's transportation 
systems by safeguarding the freedom of movement of people and 
commerce. TSA will be responsible for providing security to the 
Nation's transportation systems including aviation, railways, 
highways, pipelines, and waterways. The Act for the first time 
made overall aviation security a direct Federal responsibility.
    The Committee recommends $4,950,000,000 for the activities 
of the Transportation Security Administration for fiscal year 
2003. The amount provided is $150,000,000 more than the budget 
request.
    Challenges for the Transportation Security Administration 
(TSA).--In the Committee's view, the initial performance of the 
Transportation Security Administration has been disappointing. 
There is no question that the deadlines imposed by the Aviation 
and Transportation Security Act would be extraordinarily 
challenging for any agency to meet, even one that has been up 
and running for several decades. That said, the Committee has 
not been satisfied with the agency's performance to date, 
especially in the manner in which the agency has communicated 
with the Committee and the general public. Budget materials 
provided by the agency to the Committee have lacked the level 
of specificity and clarity that is necessary for the Committee 
to conduct proper oversight and allocate taxpayer funds. Even 
more importantly, the agency's posture with its public 
stakeholders has been characterized by arrogance and disregard 
of the public's views. This is particularly troubling given the 
fact that the agency's core mission is to reassure the public 
as to the safety of the Nation's transportation system. The 
Committee hopes and expects that the recent change in 
leadership at the agency will signal a new day in the way the 
agency interacts with the Committee and the general public.
    Programs, Projects and Activities (PPAs).--As discussed 
above, the Committee has struggled to ascertain the TSA's 
spending plans based on the budget documentation submitted by 
the agency. The statement of managers accompanying the 
Supplemental Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 2002 noted 
that, at present, there are no clearly defined Programs, 
Projects, and Activities (PPA's) established for the TSA's 
budget. The Committee anxiously awaits the TSA's submission of 
proposed PPA's so that the Committee can better understand and 
review the agency's spending priorities. Until the agency and 
the Committee comes to closure on defined PPA's for the TSA 
budget, the Committee cannot articulate its funding 
recommendation in the context of adjustments to the President's 
Budget. As such, the following table displays the minimum 
amounts provided by the Committee for the following activities.

Modification of Airports to Install Checked Baggage 
    Explosive Detection Systems Including Trace 
    Detection Systems...................................    $200,000,000
Procurement of Explosive Detection Systems and Trace 
    Detection Systems................................... \1\ 124,000,000
Intercity Bus Security Initiative.......................      15,000,000
Operation Safe Commerce.................................      35,000,000
Security Research.......................................      25,000,000
Grants to Port Authorities for Security Enhancements....     100,000,000
Transportation Information Operations Center (TIOC).....       3,500,000

\1\ Includes transfer of $55,000,000 from FAA facilities and equipment.

    Modification of Airports to Install EDS and ETD Systems.--
In reviewing the TSA's belated budget submission, the Committee 
was dismayed to learn that no additional funds have been 
budgeted for fiscal year 2003 for airport modifications 
necessary to install Explosive Detection Systems (EDS) and 
Explosive Trace Detection (ETD) systems. Over the course of the 
next several weeks, the TSA will attempt to install massive 
amounts of explosive detection equipment in the Nation's 
airports in order to comply with the ATSA's December 31st 
deadline for screening all checked baggage for explosives. By 
the agency's own admission, many of the measures that will be 
necessary to install and operate this equipment on such a short 
timeline will present considerable inconvenience to airline 
passengers, air carriers, airport manager's and airport-based 
venders. In many instances, for the lack of time and money to 
install explosive detection systems as part of the airport's 
central baggage processing system, explosive detection 
equipment will be required to be installed in terminal space 
currently used by airline passengers.
    The Committee, unlike the TSA, is not prepared to allow 
this less-than-satisfactory situation to persist for a number 
of years while the agency pursues the development of next-
generation explosive detection technologies. As such the 
Committee has provided $200,000,000 for fiscal year 2003 for 
the purpose of improving upon the interim deployment plans that 
will be necessary to comply with the December 31 deadline. The 
Committee expects these funds to be used to retrofit those 
airports that will face the greatest difficulty in minimizing 
the inconvenience of air passengers in complying with the 
December 31 deadline.
    Credentialing and screening of aviation workers.--The 
statement of managers accompanying the second Supplemental 
Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002 expressed a number of 
concerns regarding TSA's planned deployment of its 
transportation worker identity card (TWIC) initiative. The 
Committee of Conference to that bill went on to prohibit the 
TSA from obligating any funds for this initiative until the 
agency reports to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations on the concerns cited in the statement of 
managers and the agency receives written reprogramming approval 
from both Committees. In developing his reprogramming request, 
the Committee expects the Under Secretary to be particularly 
attentive to the immediate need for improved credentialing to 
allow for the expeditious and seamless movement of airline and 
airport employees. The fact that airline and airport workers 
have already undergone background investigations should 
facilitate this effort. The Committee expects the Under 
Secretary to promptly develop a credentialing system that is 
accepted throughout the airport network and is supported by a 
centralized database so that access limitations can be 
communicated promptly throughout the system. With regard to 
security screening, it is imperative that TSA develop a new 
screening process for airline and airport employees. This 
process should be conducted at separate portals from the 
screening of passengers and should be tailored to the minimal 
security risk posed by aviation employees. The TSA's current 
screening methods for aviation employees diverts limited 
security resources away from the real risks to the air 
transportation system and needlessly creates delays for workers 
providing time-critical aviation services on behalf of the 
traveling public. The Committee believes that TSA would benefit 
from the appointment of a taskforce to assist in the 
development of this new credentialing and screening system. 
Such a taskforce should include representatives from airlines, 
airports, and aviation labor. The Committee will carefully 
review the Under Secretary's reprogramming requests to 
determine the extent of his responsiveness to the Committee's 
stated concerns and directives in this area.
    Intercity Bus Security.--The Committee has provided an 
additional $15,000,000 for the TSA's continued efforts in the 
area of improving security in the intercity bus industry. These 
funds will better insure the security of millions of passengers 
that use the nation's intercity bus network.
    Operation Safe Commerce.--The Committee has provided 
$30,000,000 for the continued deployment of Operation Safe 
Commerce. These funds shall be subject to the same terms and 
conditions as articulated in the Committee report accompanying 
the fiscal year 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Bill. The 
amount provided is $2,000,000 more than the amount provided for 
fiscal year 2002.
    Security Research.--TSA will conduct research and 
development activities in an effort to improve current security 
technology. This research will be targeted toward methodologies 
of detecting potential chemical, biological or similar threats 
and devices that could be released on an aircraft or within an 
airport.
    Pilot projects.--The Committee has provided funding in 
previous appropriations acts for the TSA to conduct pilot 
projects to demonstrate and evaluate promising security 
technologies and concepts. Pilot projects provide useful data 
and practical experience regarding the effect of innovative 
approaches and technology in improving aviation security. As 
the newest large hub airport, Denver International Airport 
(DIA) is well-suited as a location for testing new security 
systems, and the Committee encourages the Under Secretary to 
consider DIA as a candidate for conducting pilot projects, 
including tests of new explosive detection equipment.
    Security Research Centers.--The FAA has established strong 
collaborative research efforts with universities and private 
industry, and this beneficial arrangement has helped advanced a 
variety of aviation interests. The Committee believes that the 
Under Secretary could achieve similar benefits in the area of 
transportation security by establishing similar alliances. 
Therefore, the Committee encourages the Under Secretary, as the 
TSA continues to refine its research and development program, 
to utilize expertise at the following institutions: Center for 
Industrial Competitiveness at the University of Massachusetts-
Lowell; National Institute for Advanced Transportation 
Technology at the University of Idaho; State University System 
of Florida's Consortium for Intermodal Transportation Safety 
and Security; Aviation Institute at the University of Nebraska 
at Omaha; and, the Center of Excellence for Aviation Security.
    Oversize Inspection System.--The Committee encourages the 
Under Secretary to develop of a prototype oversize inspection 
system which uses multiple analysis techniques, including a 
high penetration beam and high performance sensors, to screen 
cargo containers, vehicles, and other large objects.
    Automated Surveillance System.--The Committee encourages 
the Under Secretary to develop airport checkpoint security and 
process management initiative at the Wichita Mid-Continent 
Airport that links video technology with advanced software for 
real-time identification of security risks and can alert 
appropriate security personnel.
    Remote baggage screening.--The Committee encourages the 
Under Secretary to develop a pilot project at Anchorage 
International Airport that will evaluate the potential of a 
rapid baggage movement system to screen checked luggage for 
explosives at an off-site facility.
    Grants to Port Authorities for Security Enhancements.--The 
Committee has provided $100,000,000 for port security grants in 
fiscal year 2003. These grants will be competitively awarded by 
the Under Secretary for the purpose of assessing and improving 
security at the Nation's seaports. While a total of 
$218,000,000 was made available for this activity between the 
first and second Supplemental Appropriations Acts for 2002, the 
Department of Transportation's solicitation for applications 
demonstrated an initial demand for these grants of almost 
$700,000,000. Funds provided in fiscal year 2003 will help meet 
this demand.
    Integrated Port Security Pilot Projects.--The Committee is 
supportive of a series of integrated port security pilot 
projects that involve information sharing between the busiest 
container and cruise ship ports in the southeastern United 
States. In distributing funds under the port security grant 
program for fiscal year 2002 and fiscal year 2003, the 
Committee encourages the Under Secretary to positively consider 
applications for such an integrated set of pilot projects. 
Elements of these pilot projects might include the improvement 
of surveillance systems, the use of smart cards and biometric 
technology, vehicular traffic control, cargo inspection, 
improved communications infrastructure and information systems 
infrastructure, as well as passenger and baggage screening for 
cruise ship passengers.
    Transportation Information Operations Center (TIOC).--As 
part of the budget request for the Fiscal Year 2002 
Supplemental Appropriations Act the Secretary of Transportation 
requested $3,500,000 for the establishment of a Transportation 
Information Operations Center at DOT headquarters. The 
Committee of Conference on the fiscal year 2002 Supplemental 
Appropriations Bill deferred consideration of this request, 
given the uncertainty surrounding what security 
responsibilities would reside within DOT should a new Office of 
Homeland Security be established. The Committee has provided 
the necessary funding for the establishment of the TIOC at this 
time and will continue to monitor whether such a facility will 
be necessary when, and if, there is a newly established 
distribution of security responsibilities within the Federal 
Government.
    Fitness for Duty Requirements.--The Committee is concerned 
that the Under Secretary has not as yet implemented the new 
requirement imposed by the Aviation and Transportation Security 
Act that airport security screeners demonstrate daily their 
fitness-for-duty without impairment due to fatigue, 
medications, drug use or alcohol. The Committee strongly 
recommends that the Under Secretary make expedited use of 
currently available fitness-for-duty technology to assess daily 
the alertness of airport security.
    Air Marshall air-ground communications.--Funding was 
provided in fiscal year 2002 for procurement of air-ground 
communications systems for Federal air marshals. The Committee 
expects the Under Secretary to proceed expeditiously with this 
procurement and begin installation of such systems on major 
commercial passenger aircraft as soon as possible.

                            U.S. COAST GUARD


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2002 Program

    The U.S. Coast Guard, as it is known today, was established 
on January 28, 1915, through the merger of the Revenue Cutter 
Service and the Lifesaving Service. In 1939, the U.S. 
Lighthouse Service was transferred to the Coast Guard, followed 
by the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation in 1942. The 
Coast Guard has as its primary responsibilities the enforcement 
of all applicable Federal laws on the high seas and waters 
subject to the jurisdiction of the United States; promotion of 
safety of life and property at sea; assistance to navigation; 
protection of the marine environment; and maintenance of a 
state of readiness to function as a specialized service in the 
Navy in time of war (14 U.S.C. 1, 2).
    The Committee recommends a total program level of 
$6,071,978,000 for the activities of the Coast Guard in fiscal 
year 2003. This represents an increase of $832,319,000 (16 
percent) above the fiscal year 2002 enacted level. The 
following table summarizes the Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Fiscal year--
                                                          ----------------------------------      Committee
                         Program                             2002 enacted    2003 estimate   recommendations \5\
                                                               \1\ \3\            \4\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operating expenses \2\...................................   3,382,000,000    4,153,456,000      4,318,456,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reduction of $1,471,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\ Includes funding for national security activities of the Coast Guard scored against budget function 050
  (defense discretionary) as follows: fiscal year 2002 enacted amount includes $440,000,000 in defense
  discretionary funding; fiscal year 2003 estimate includes $340,000,000 and fiscal year 2003 Committee
  recommendation includes $340,000,000.
\3\ Excludes $209,150,000 in Emergency Supplemental Appropriations, pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\4\ Excludes $22,284,000 in civilian and $293,858,000 in military accruals. Excludes $165,000,000 in new user
  fee revenue.
\5\ Includes $300,000,000 provided in the Department of Defense appropriations bill.

                           Operating Expenses


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                New user fee
                                               General            Trust            revenue            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\ \5\........    $3,357,055,000       $24,945,000  ................    $3,382,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \3\...............     4,129,126,000        25,000,000      $165,000,000     4,318,456,000
Committee recommendation \4\ \6\........     4,293,456,000        25,000,000  ................     4,318,456,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $440,000,000 for national security activities scored against budget function 050 (defense).
\2\ Excludes reduction of $1,471,000 rescission pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-117.
\3\ Includes $340,000,000 for national security activities scored against budget function 050 (defense).
\4\ Includes $340,000,000 for national security activities including drug interdiction scored against budget
  function 050 (defense).
\5\ Excludes $209,150,000 in Emergency Supplemental Appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\6\ Includes $300,000,000 provided in the Department of Defense appropriations bill.

    The ``Operating expenses'' appropriation provides funds for 
the operation and maintenance of multipurpose vessels, 
aircraft, and shore units strategically located along the 
coasts and inland waterways of the United States and in 
selected areas overseas.
    The program activities of this appropriation fall into the 
following categories:
    Search and rescue.--One of its earliest and most 
traditional missions, the Coast Guard maintains a nationwide 
system of boats, aircraft, cutters, and rescue coordination 
centers on 24-hour alert.
    Aids to navigation.--To help mariners determine their 
location and avoid accidents, the Coast Guard maintains a 
network of manned and unmanned aids to navigation along our 
coasts and on our inland waterways, and operates radio stations 
in the United States and abroad to serve the needs of the armed 
services and marine and air commerce.
    Marine safety.--The Coast Guard insures compliance with 
Federal statutes and regulations designed to improve safety in 
the merchant marine industry and operates a recreational 
boating safety program.
    Marine environmental protection.--The primary objectives of 
this program are to minimize the dangers of marine pollution 
and to assure the safety of U.S. ports and waterways.
    Enforcement of laws and treaties.--The Coast Guard is the 
principal maritime enforcement agency with regard to Federal 
laws on the navigable waters of the United States and the high 
seas, including fisheries, drug smuggling, illegal immigration, 
and hijacking of vessels.
    Ice operations.--In the Arctic and Antarctic, Coast Guard 
icebreakers escort supply ships, support research activities 
and Department of Defense operations, survey uncharted waters, 
and collect scientific data. The Coast Guard also assists 
commercial vessels through ice-covered waters.
    Defense readiness.--During peacetime the Coast Guard 
maintains an effective state of military preparedness to 
operate as a service in the Navy in time of war or national 
emergency at the direction of the President. As such the Coast 
Guard has primary responsibility for the security of ports, 
waterways, and navigable waters up to 200 miles offshore.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommendation for Coast Guard operating 
expenses is $4,318,456,000, including $25,000,000 from the oil 
spill liability trust fund and $340,000,000 from function 050 
for the Coast Guard's defense-related activities including drug 
interdiction. Within the amount recommended, $300,000,000 is 
provided in the Department of Defense appropriations bill. This 
is $165,000,000 more than the budget request and $936,456,000 
(27 percent) more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level.
    Mission Emphasis.--The Coast Guard responded to the 
terrorist attacks of last September in an unprecedented and 
dramatic manner. In doing so, they refocused nearly all of 
their personnel and redirected most of their cutters, boats and 
aircraft on domestic maritime security. While the Coast Guard 
has on a number of occasions been required to rapidly shift its 
mission emphasis, the extent of the shift to domestic security 
that followed the events of September 11th was certainly 
unprecedented in the history of the Coast Guard. The Committee 
believes that the Coast Guard acted with extraordinary 
professionalism and heroism during this period of rapid 
transformation. At the same time, the Committee has concerns 
regarding the Coast Guard's ability to once again achieve 
mission balance and adequately address its other critical 
missions--missions including Search and Rescue, Drug and 
Migrant Interdiction, the maintenance of Aids to Navigation and 
ensuring the safety and integrity of our domestic fishing 
grounds.
    As part of the Committee's annual hearing regarding the 
Coast Guard's budget request, the DOT Inspector General 
reported that the service deployed 59 percent of its resources 
on port safety and security missions immediately following 
September 11th. Those resources included the Coast Guard's core 
Search and Rescue vessels, some of which were repositioned far 
away from their optimal location for conducting their Search 
and Rescue mission. Indeed, the IG noted that the Coast Guard's 
small boat stations experienced a 50 percent increase in 
operating hours as they sought to perform all of their new port 
security responsibilities at the same time they were seeking to 
maintain an effective Search and Rescue program.
    The information provided below illustrates exactly how the 
Coast Guard directed its mission emphasis over the last year. 
It depicts an overall increase in operating hours in the first 
quarter of fiscal year 2002 reflecting the rapid response to 
the terrorist attacks. That surge began to level off in the 
third quarter of fiscal year 2002 as the Coast Guard sought to 
return to a more balanced level of effort across its missions. 
A review of the data for the third quarter of fiscal year 
2002--the most recent quarter for which data is available--
reveals that many of the missions that suffered the greatest 
diminution of effort following September 11th have not yet 
returned to their baseline level. Indeed, the Committee is 
greatly concerned that the agencies new emphasis on security, 
as articulated in its fiscal year 2003 budget request, means 
that the Coast Guard has no intention of restoring missions 
like drug interdiction and fisheries enforcement to their pre-
September 11th levels.


    The Committee does not question the need for a more robust 
homeland security focus on the part of the Coast Guard. Even 
so, the Committee is disappointed that, at a time when the 
Administration is requesting an historic and well deserved 
funding increase for the Coast Guard, almost the entire 
increase is devoted to expanded homeland defense efforts. 
Indeed, the documentation accompanying this budget request 
confirms the agency's intention to continue to de-emphasize its 
non-homeland defense missions while its budget grows. The 
Committee does not agree that, at a time when the Coast Guard's 
operating budget is growing by double-digit percentages, the 
taxpayer should be content with a diminished effort in the 
areas of marine safety, marine environmental protection, drug 
interdiction and fisheries enforcement.
    In order to address this concern, the Committee is granting 
the Commandant the flexibility to redress this imbalance. The 
Committee fully funds the $21,724,000 sought for Maritime 
Search and Rescue improvements--budget category IV F--and 
disallows funding for budget category IV G since this item is 
not consistent with the Coast Guard's Ports and Waterways 
Safety Systems (PAWSS) strategy. With the more than 
$450,000,000 in additional funding provided in this 
appropriation to operate new facilities and commence or enhance 
new initiatives, the Committee expects the Commandant to launch 
his highest priority initiatives for homeland defense while 
leaving himself sufficient resources to return his non-homeland 
security missions to their pre-September 11th levels.
    The Committee directs the Commandant to submit a detailed 
report as to how he will achieve this objective as part of his 
budget submission for fiscal year 2004. This report should 
include a detailed revised distribution of fiscal year 2003 
resources in comparison to the line items initially requested 
in the fiscal year 2003 budget request. In order to monitor the 
Commandant's progress toward this goal, the Committee directs 
the Commandant to submit quarterly reports to the Committee 
detailing the resource hours achieved by mission. This report 
should also include district-by-district data for aircraft, 
cutter, and boat hours by mission area. The report should also 
compare this data to the comparable data for the eight quarters 
that preceded September 11, 2001. These reports will be 
submitted using the same deadlines and restrictions pertaining 
to the agency's Quarterly Acquisition Reports.
    The Committee recognizes that the integrity of the Coast 
Guard's mission hour data has been compromised in the past due 
to inconsistencies in unit's reporting practices in the field. 
The Committee commends the Commandant's efforts to date to 
improve the accuracy of this data and requests that the DOT 
Inspector General periodically monitor the reporting of this 
data as well as the accuracy of the quarterly mission hour 
reports to be submitted to the Committee.
    Flag Officer Billets.--The Committee has provided 
sufficient funds for the retention of 34 flag billets in fiscal 
year 2003, the full amount requested in the Coast Guard's 
budget request. The Committee notes that the number of flag 
officer billets has grown steadily in the last few years even 
though the Coast Guard has consistently had the lowest ratio of 
officers to flag officers and enlisted personnel to flag 
officers of any of the military services. The Committee 
recognizes that an even higher level of flag officer billets 
may be authorized. However, the Committee is concerned that the 
budget justifications submitted to the Committee have not 
accurately reflected the number of flag officers requested for 
the budget year. Specifically, the budget justification for 
fiscal year 2000 identified an expectation for one additional 
flag billet in the budget year. With the arrival of the 2001 
budget request, the Committee discovered that the service added 
two additional flag billets in fiscal year 2000. Similarly, the 
2002 budget request did not identify any growth in the number 
of flag officers for that year. With the arrival of the budget 
request for 2003, the Committee discovered that the service had 
indeed added another flag officer in 2002. For fiscal year 
2003, the budget request seeks a total of 34 flag officers and 
the Committee has provided sufficient sums for that number.
    Navigational Assistance Services Fees.--For the second 
consecutive year, the Administration had proposed the 
initiation of new Navigational Assistance Service fees. The 
effect of this proposal is to lower the actual appropriation 
requirement for Coast Guard operating expenses in fiscal year 
2003 by $165,000,000 by requiring the users of Coast Guard 
services to cover those costs. The Committee has, again, 
rejected this approach and provided sufficient appropriations 
to cover all of the Coast Guard's needs.
    Marine Fire and Safety Association.--The Committee remains 
supportive of efforts by the Marine Fire and Safety Association 
(MFSA) to provide specialized firefighting training and 
maintain an oil spill response contingency plan for the 
Columbia River. The Committee encourages the Secretary to 
provide funding for MFSA consistent with the authorization and 
directs the Secretary to provide $312,000 to continue efforts 
by the nonprofit organization comprised of numerous fire 
departments on both sides of the Columbia River. The funding 
will be utilized to provide specialized communications, 
firefighting training and equipment, and to implement the oil 
spill response contingency plan for the Columbia River.
    Great Lakes Pilotage.--The Committee is informed that the 
Great Lakes ports collectively petitioned the Coast Guard in 
July 2001 to publish for public comment a proposed plan to 
streamline and modernize the pilotage system on the Great 
Lakes. The Committee is concerned that the Coast Guard has not 
acted on this petition. The Committee urges the Coast Guard to 
seek public comment on this issue.
    AMSEA.--The Committee recommends $350,000 to be available 
only to continue this marine safety training program that 
trains fishermen and children in cold water safety techniques.
    Oil spill prevention, 13th District.--Within the amount 
provided, the Committee has provided $1,600,000 for enhanced 
oil spill prevention activities in the waters of Washington 
State. These additional funds shall be under the sole control 
of the Captain of the Port-Puget Sound and will be in addition 
to any and all funds that would normally be allocated for 
marine environmental protection activities to that unit under 
the President's budget request. The Captain of the Port-Puget 
Sound is the Federal official solely responsible for preventing 
the accidental release of oil from tankers entering the Straits 
of Juan de Fuca and Puget Sound. As such, the Committee expects 
the Captain of the Port to use his professional judgment in 
allocating these funds to measures that he believes will best 
protect these waters. Such measures could include a cost 
sharing arrangement with the State of Washington for the hiring 
of a rescue tug at Neah Bay. However, these funds could be 
allocated to alternative measures if, in the view of the 
Captain of the Port, such alternative measures will provide a 
superior level of protection. The Committee expects the 
Commandant to forward to the Committee a spend plan for these 
funds once the Captain of the Port has decided on the 
appropriate approach to enhancing environmental protection in 
his area of operation.
    Station Indian River Inlet Staffing.--The Committee is 
aware that a staffing shortage may exist at Coast Guard Station 
Indian River Inlet following the addition of new security 
requirements. The station, which is currently staffed by nine 
personnel, acts as the gateway to the ports of Wilmington, 
Delaware and Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. The men and women at 
this station maintain a safe and secure waterway for vessels 
traveling to these ports. They also provide waterside security 
for the Salem Nuclear Power Plant, bridges over navigational 
waters, oil refineries and tourist attractions along the 
Delaware River, Delaware Bay and Delaware's Atlantic Coast. As 
such, the Commandant is directed to evaluate the staffing 
levels at this station to determine if additional staffing is 
necessary.
    Coastwise Endorsements.--More than 5 years after Congress 
enacted section 113(d) of the Coast Guard Authorization Act of 
1996 (now codified at 46 U.S.C. 12106(e)), the Agency has yet 
to promulgate regulations implementing the provision. The 
Committee is concerned that the resulting lack of Federal 
direction could allow control over U.S. coastwise vessels by 
foreign companies who may use tax and other advantages to 
compete unfairly with U.S. companies in domestic commerce. The 
Congressional intent in 1996, which has not changed in enacting 
section 113(d), was to provide U.S.-based coastwise vessel 
operators with broadened sources of investment capital. At no 
time did Congress intend that section 113(d) be interpreted as 
a means of undermining the integrity of the Jones Act and 
related Maritime Cabotage laws. Until the rule implementing 
subsection 12106(e) is published in final form, the Committee 
expects the Coast Guard to ensure that any application approved 
under this provision is fully consistent with the intent of 
Congress as stated in the 1996 Conference Report.
    Datum marker buoys (DMBs).--The Committee allowance 
includes not less than $1,000,000 for the continued procurement 
of Datum Marker Buoys.
    Maritime Electro-Optical Infrared (EO/IR) Handheld and 
Fixed Sensors.--Within the funds provided, the Committee 
provides $5,000,000 for Maritime Electro-Optical Sensors. Of 
this amount, $3,000,000 shall be derived from budget category 
IV G and $2,000,000 from the additional funds provided. These 
sensors are on cutters, patrol boats, as well as for Marine 
Safety Offices and Marine Safety and Security Teams. They will 
assist in both the maritime safety and security mission goals 
by enabling Coast Guard personnel to conduct maritime 
operations safely and effectively at night and in adverse 
weather conditions.
    Coast Guard Yard.--The Committee recognizes the Coast Guard 
Yard at Curtis Bay, Maryland is a critical component of the 
Coast Guard's core logistics capability that directly supports 
fleet readiness. The Committee further recognizes that the yard 
has been a vital part of the Coast Guard's readiness 
infrastructure for more than 100 years and believes that 
sufficient industrial work should be assigned to the Yard to 
maintain this capability.

              Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\........................................    $616,354,000     $20,000,000   $636,354,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\.......................................     705,000,000      20,000,000    725,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................  ..............  ..............    725,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reduction of $294,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\ Excludes $1,266,000 in civilian and $9,580,000 in military accurals.

    This appropriation provides for the major acquisition, 
construction, and improvement of vessels, aircraft, shore 
units, and aids to navigation operated and maintained by the 
Coast Guard. Currently, the Coast Guard has in operation 
approximately 250 cutters, ranging in size from 65-foot tugs to 
a 420-foot polar icebreakers, more than 2,000 boats, and an 
inventory of more than 200 helicopters and fixed-wing aircraft. 
The Coast Guard also operates approximately 600 stations, 
support and supply centers, communications facilities, and 
other shore units. The Coast Guard maintains over 48,000 
navigational aids--buoys, fixed aids, lighthouses, and radio 
navigational stations.

                        committee recommendation

    The recommended bill provides $725,000,000 for acquisition, 
construction, and improvements, including $20,000,000 from the 
oil spill liability trust fund. This represents an increase of 
$88,646,000 (14 percent) above last year's enacted level and is 
the same as the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's programmatic 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003     Committee
                                                                enacted \1\        estimate       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels....................................................      $89,640,000       $13,600,000       $13,600,000
Integrated Deepwater Systems Program.......................      320,190,000       500,000,000       480,000,000
Aircraft...................................................        9,500,000   ................  ...............
Other equipment............................................       79,293,000       117,700,000       117,700,000
Shore facilities and aids to navigation....................       73,100,000        28,700,000        45,700,000
Personnel and related support..............................       64,631,000        65,000,000        65,000,000
                                                            ----------------------------------------------------
      Total................................................      636,354,000       725,000,000       725,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reduction of $294,000 rescission pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 108-117.

    The following table compares the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
level, the fiscal year 2003 estimate, and the recommended level 
by program, project, and activity.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                            Fiscal year
                          Program name                           --------------------------------    Committee
                                                                   2002 enacted    2003 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Vessels:
    Survey and design--cutters and boats........................        $500,000        $400,000        $400,000
    Seagoing buoytenders (WLB) replacement......................      68,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Polar class reliability improvement (RIP)...................       4,490,000       2,200,000       2,200,000
    41 foot utility boat replacement............................      12,000,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    85 foot fast patrol craft...................................       4,650,000  ..............  ..............
    Alex Haley conversion.......................................  ..............       3,000,000       3,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal vessels..........................................      89,640,000      13,600,000      13,600,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Integrated Deepwater Systems program (IDS):
    Aircraft....................................................      35,700,000     138,200,000     135,200,000
    Surface ships...............................................      36,700,000     215,700,000     212,700,000
    C4ISR.......................................................     106,500,000  ..............  ..............
    Logistics...................................................      71,200,000      71,600,000      66,600,000
    Other contracts.............................................      39,800,000      43,500,000      36,500,000
    Government Program Management...............................      30,300,000      31,000,000      29,000,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal IDS..............................................     320,200,000     500,000,000     480,000,000
Aircraft:
    Aviation parts and support..................................       9,000,000  ..............  ..............
    C130J system provisioning and training analyses.............         500,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal aircraft.........................................       9,500,000  ..............  ..............
                                                                 ===============================================
Other Equipment:
    Ports and Waterways Safety Systems (PAWSS)..................       6,000,000       5,000,000       5,000,000
    Marine information for safety & law enforcement.............       7,450,000  ..............  ..............
    National distress system modernization......................      42,000,000      90,000,000      90,000,000
    Defense message system implementation.......................       1,500,000       2,100,000       2,100,000
    Commercial satellite communication..........................       1,500,000  ..............  ..............
    Global maritime distress and safety system..................       2,200,000       2,200,000       2,200,000
    Search and rescue capabilities..............................       1,320,000  ..............  ..............
    Thirteenth district microwave modernization.................         800,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    Hawaii Rainbow communications system........................       3,100,000       3,000,000       3,000,000
    High frequency recapitalizaion & modernization..............       2,000,000       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Prince William Sound Microwave wide-area....................  ..............       1,000,000       1,000,000
    Command center readiness/infrastructure.....................         727,000  ..............  ..............
    P-250 pump replacement......................................       2,046,000  ..............  ..............
    Configuration management--phase II..........................       3,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Self-contained breathing apparatus..........................       1,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Maritime electro-optical sensors............................       4,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Ice detecting radar--Cordova, AK............................         650,000  ..............  ..............
    Maritime domain awareness information.......................  ..............       9,400,000       9,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal other equipment..................................      79,293,000     117,700,000     117,700,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Shore Facilities & aids to navigation:
    Survey and design--shore projects...........................       4,000,000       2,500,000       2,500,000
    Minor AC&I shore construction projects......................       4,000,000       4,900,000       4,900,000
    Housing.....................................................      13,500,000       7,000,000       7,000,000
    Waterways ATON projects.....................................       5,500,000       4,900,000       4,900,000
    Rebuild Station Port Huron, MI..............................       3,100,000  ..............  ..............
    Consolidate warehouse--CG Yard, MD..........................      12,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Construct new station--Brunswick, GA........................       3,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Replace utilities, ISC building Number 8--Boston, MA........       1,600,000  ..............  ..............
    Construct engineering bldg, ISC Honolulu, HI................       7,200,000  ..............  ..............
    Consolidate Kodiak aviation support--Kodiak, AK.............       5,700,000       4,000,000       4,000,000
    Reconstruct north wall, Escanaba Municipal dock.............         300,000  ..............  ..............
    Rebuild ISC Seattle Pier 36--Phase I........................      10,000,000  ..............      16,000,000
    CG Marine safety & rescue station, Chicago, IL..............       2,000,000  ..............  ..............
    Vessel pier facility, Cordova Ak............................  ..............  ..............       4,000,000
    Station Manistee, MI construction...........................  ..............       5,400,000       5,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal shore facilities.................................      73,100,000      28,700,000      48,700,000
                                                                 ===============================================
Personnel and Related Support:
    Direct personnel costs......................................      63,931,000      64,500,000      64,500,000
    Core acquisition costs......................................         700,000         500,000         500,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Subtotal personnel and related support....................      64,631,000      65,000,000      65,000,000
                                                                 ===============================================
      Total appropriation.......................................     636,354,000     725,000,000     725,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                vessels

    Response Boat Small.--The Committee notes that the Coast 
Guard is procuring a new standard small boat to provide the 
lower range capability of its shore-based response system. 
These Response Boats will be procured under an indefinite 
delivery, indefinite quantity (IDIQ) contract for a period of 
seven years, with an initial purchase quantity of 100 boats and 
a maximum quantity of 700. The Committee notes with concern, 
however, that the Coast Guard in the FRP has specified a 
specific design technology for the outboard motors that will 
power the Response Boat Small fleet.
    It has been reported to the Committee that the decision on 
the specified engine technology may have been based on an out-
of-date survey. The Committee, however, is more concerned that 
a Coast Guard FRP would still limit competition by mandating a 
specific engine technology rather than use a performance-based 
specification to maximize competition while ensuring all basic 
requirements are met this far into the era of procurement 
reform.
    Accordingly, prior to exercising any options beyond the 
purchase of the first 100 boats, the Coast Guard may modify the 
contract to be either a pure performance-based specification or 
to specifically allow both direct injection and four-stroke 
engines to be considered by boat manufacturers as long as they 
meet the requisite performance and environmental criteria and 
such a change is merited based on the results of the most 
recent internal Coast Guard study.

                  INTEGRATED DEEPWATER SYSTEMS PROGRAM

    The Committee has provided $480,000,000 for the Integrated 
Deepwater Systems (IDS) program, which is $159,800,000 or 50 
percent more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted level and 
$20,000,000 less the budget request.

      NATIONAL DISTRESS AND RESPONSE SYSTEM MODERNIZATION PROGRAM

    The Committee recommends $90,000,000 requested for the 
modernization of the National Distress and Response System 
(NDRS), which is effectively the maritime 911 system for 
mariners in distress.

                            other equipment

    The Committee provided $117,700,000 for Other Equipment 
which is the same as the budget request.

                shore facilities and aids to navigation

    Minor AC&I Shore Construction Projects.--The Committee 
recommends $4,900,000 for Minor AC&I shore constructions 
projects, which is the same as the budget request. Within the 
funds provided, $400,000 is provided for construction of 
engineering building at U.S. Coast Guard Station Portsmouth 
Harbor in New Castle, New Hampshire.
    Rebuild ISC Seattle Pier 36--Phase I.--The Committee 
recommendation includes an additional $16,000,000 for costs 
associated with repairing and rebuilding the Coast Guard's 
Integrated Support Center at Pier 36 in Seattle. Now that a 
decision has been made not to move the Integrated Support 
Center to an alternative site, the Committee believes it is 
time to move out rapidly to replace the aging infrastructure at 
pier 36 and give the Coast Guard personnel that work there a 
safe and appropriate working environment. With the funds 
provided for this initiative in this bill and in prior 
Appropriations Acts including the Supplemental Appropriations 
Act for fiscal year 2002, there is now adequate funding to 
fully cover the cost of design and construction of major 
elements of this project. The Committee directs the Commandant 
to submit an anticipated spend plan and construction schedule 
for this initiative prior to conference committee action on 
this bill.

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Capital investment plan.--The bill maintains the 
requirement for the Coast Guard to submit a 5-year capital 
investment plan with initial submission of the President's 
budget request. This requirement was first established in 
fiscal year 2001.
    Disposal of real property.--The bill maintains the 
provision enacted in fiscal year 2001 crediting to this 
appropriation proceeds from the sale or lease of the Coast 
Guard's surplus real property and providing that such receipts 
are available for obligation only for the national distress and 
response system modernization program.

                Environmental Compliance and Restoration

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $16,927,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      17,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      17,000,000

\1\ Excludes reduction of $9,000 pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-
117.
\2\ Excludes $218,000 in civilian and $68,000 in military accruals.

    The Environmental Compliance and Restoration account 
provides funds to address environmental problems at former and 
current Coast Guard units as required by applicable Federal, 
State, and local environmental laws and regulations. Planned 
expenditures for these funds include major upgrades to 
petroleum and regulated-substance storage tanks, restoration of 
contaminated ground water and soils, remediation efforts at 
hazardous substance disposal sites, and initial site surveys 
and actions necessary to bring Coast Guard shore facilities and 
vessels into compliance with environmental laws and 
regulations.
    The recommended bill provides $17,000,000 for environmental 
compliance and restoration. The recommendation is the same as 
the budget request.

                         Alteration of Bridges


                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $15,466,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      14,000,000

    The ``Alteration of bridges'' appropriation provides funds 
for the Coast Guard's share of the cost of altering or removing 
bridges obstructive to navigation. Under the provisions of the 
Truman-Hobbs Act of June 21, 1940, as amended (33 U.S.C. 511 et 
seq.), the Coast Guard, as the Federal Government's agent, is 
required to share with owners the cost of altering railroad and 
publicly owned highway bridges which obstruct the free movement 
of navigation on navigable waters of the United States in 
accordance with the formula established in 33 U.S.C. 516. 
Alteration of obstructive highway bridges is eligible for 
funding from the Federal-Aid Highways program.
    The Committee has provided an appropriation from the 
highway trust fund of $14,000,000 for the alteration of 
bridges, which is the same as the budget request.
    The Committee recommendation is to be distributed as 
follows:
                                                               Committee
        Bridge and Location                               recommendation
Chelsea Street Bridge Project, Boston, MA...............   $2,000,000.00
EJ&E Railroad Bridge, Morris, IL........................    1,000,000.00
Fourteen Mile CSX Railroad Bridge, Mobile, AL...........    5,000,000.00
John F. Limehouse Bridge, Charleston, SC................    1,500,000.00
Florida Avenue Bridge, New Orleans, LA..................    4,500,000.00
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................   14,000,000.00

    EJ&E Bridge.--The Committee is concerned about the 
alteration of the EJ&E railroad bridge near Morris, Illinois. 
To date, the Committee has provided more than $6,500,000 for 
this important bridge project in fiscal years 2000, 2001, and 
2002. It is the Committee's understanding that design and 
engineering work has been completed. The Committee provides 
$1,000,000 for this bridge project and directs the Coast Guard 
to initiate construction on this project.

                              Retired Pay

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory)........................    $876,346,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory).......................................
Committee recommendation (mandatory)....................     889,000,000

    The ``Retired pay'' appropriation provides for retired pay 
of military personnel of the Coast Guard and Coast Guard 
Reserve, members of the former Lighthouse Service, and for 
annuities payable to beneficiaries of retired military 
personnel under the retired serviceman's family protection plan 
(10 U.S.C. 1431-1446) and survivor benefit plan (10 U.S.C. 
1447-1455), payments for career status bonuses under the 
National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2000, and 
for payments for medical care of retired personnel and their 
dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act.

                  Coast Guard Military Retirement Fund

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory)........................................
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory).......................    $889,000,000
Committee recommendation (mandatory)....................................

    The Administration proposed legislation in October 2001, to 
accrue fully the retirement costs of Coast Guard military 
personnel (as well as the Public Health Service and National 
Oceanic and Atmospheric administration Commissioned Corps). The 
account will make payments to current retirees, receive the 
accrual payments from Coast Guard accounts for current active 
duty members, and receive a payment for unfunded liabilities of 
Coast Guard personnel.
    The program also provides for retired pay of military 
personnel of the Coast Guard Reserve, members of the former 
Lighthouse Service, and for annuities payable to the 
beneficiaries of retired military personnel under the retired 
Serviceman's family protection plan (10 U.S.C. 1431-46) and the 
survivor benefit plans (10 U.S.C. 1447-55); payments for career 
status bonuses under the National Defense Authorization Act; 
and payments for medical care of retired personnel and their 
dependents under the Dependents Medical Care Act (10 U.S.C., 
ch. 55).
    As discussed earlier in this report, the Committee has not 
appropriated funds based on the administration's proposed 
legislation as no action has been taken to enact this proposal 
by the Committee of jurisdiction.

                            Reserve Training

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $83,194,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      86,522,000
Committee recommendation................................      86,522,000

\1\ Excludes reduction of $41,000 pursuant Public Laws 107-87 and 107-
117.
\2\ Excludes $303,000 civilian and $26,000,000 military accruals.

    Under the provisions of 14 U.S.C. 145, the Secretary of 
Transportation is required to adequately support the 
development and training of a Reserve force to ensure that the 
Coast Guard will be sufficiently organized, manned, and 
equipped to fully perform its wartime missions. The purpose of 
the Reserve training program is to provide trained units and 
qualified persons for active duty in the Coast Guard in time of 
war or national emergency, or at such other times as the 
national security requires. Coast Guard reservists must also 
train for mobilization assignments that are unique to the Coast 
Guard in times of war, such as port security operations 
associated with the Coast Guard's Maritime Defense Zone [MDZ] 
mission, and deployable port security units associated with the 
international Defense Operations mission.
    The recommended bill includes $86,522,000 for reserve 
training, which is the budget request.

              Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                      General          Trust           Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\........................................     $16,730,000      $3,492,000     $20,222,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\.......................................      19,606,000       3,500,000      22,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................  ..............  ..............      22,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes reduction of $6,000 pursuant to Public Laws 107-87 and 107-117.
\2\ Excludes $328,000 and $778,000 military accurals.

    The Coast Guard's Research and Development Program seeks to 
improve the tools and techniques with which Coast Guard carries 
out its varied operational missions and to increase the 
knowledge base upon which it depends to fulfill its regulatory 
responsibilities.
    The recommended bill provides a funding level of 
$22,000,000 for research and development projects, which is 
with the budget request. Of this amount $3,500,000 is to be 
derived from the oil spill liability trust fund. This 
recommendation is consistent with the budget request.
    Engineered Wood Composites Technology.--The Committee is 
aware of engineered wood composites technology developed by the 
University of Maine. Engineered Wood Composites are designed to 
reduce maintenance cost and extend the useful life of 
waterfront structures. A total of $3,000,000 is provided within 
the funds made available to support the continued development, 
demonstration and evaluation of engineered wood composites at 
Coast Guard facilities including the U.S. Coast Guard Stations 
in Jonesport and Southwest Harbor ME.
    Spectral Imaging Technology.--Within the funds provided, 
$2,500,000 is included for a pilot project to test automatic 
Search and Rescue Spectral Imaging technology for Coast Guard 
C-130 at Kalaeloa, Hawaii
    Maritime Domain Awareness Information.--The Committee is 
aware of the need to improve maritime domain awareness and 
encourages the Coast Guard to investigate designing and 
installing a Maritime Domain Awareness Surveillance System 
demonstration project in an effort to improve port security.
    Meteorological and Marine Observation Systems.--Within the 
funds provided, $250,000 is included for a prototype 
observation system in the Lower Chesapeake Bay. The Committee 
believes that such a system will improve short-and long-term 
predictions of phenomenon facilitating safe and efficient 
maritime operations.

                              Boat Safety


                     (AQUATIC RESOURCES TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002 (mandatory)........................     $64,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (mandatory).......................      64,000,000
Committee recommendation (mandatory)....................      64,000,000

    This account provides financial assistance for a 
coordinated National Recreational Boating Safety Program for 
the several States. Title 46, United States Code, section 
13106, establishes a ``Boat safety'' account from which the 
Secretary may allocate and distribute matching funds to assist 
in the development, administration, and financing of qualifying 
State programs. The ``Boat safety'' account consists of amounts 
transferred from the highway trust fund which are derived from 
the motorboat fuel tax (18.4 cents per gallon).
    The Transportation Efficiency Act for the 21st Century 
provides $64,000,000 of mandatory funding from the ``Aquatic 
Resources Trust fund'' annually for this program. Of this 
amount, $59,000,000 is provided for grants to States and 
$5,000,000 for Coast Guard administration. The President's 
budget requests no discretionary appropriations for fiscal year 
2003.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Vessel traffic safety fairway, Santa Barbara/San 
Francisco.--The bill retains a general provision (sec. 312) 
that would prohibit funds to plan, finalize, or implement 
regulations that would establish a vessel traffic safety 
fairway less than 5 miles wide between the Santa Barbara 
traffic separation scheme and the San Francisco traffic 
separation scheme. On April 27, 1989, the Department published 
a notice of proposed rulemaking that would narrow the 
originally proposed 5-mile-wide fairway to two 1-mile-wide 
fairways separated by a 2-mile-wide area where off-shore oil 
rigs could be built if Lease Sale 119 goes forward. Under this 
revised proposal, vessels would be routed in close proximity to 
oil rigs because the 2-mile-wide non-fairway corridor could 
contain drilling rigs at the edge of the fairways. The 
Committee is concerned that this rule, if implemented, could 
increase the threat of offshore oil accidents off the 
California coast. Accordingly, the bill continues the language 
prohibiting the implementation of this regulation.
    Quarterly acquisition reports.--The bill retains a general 
provision (sec. 341) requiring that the Coast Guard submit a 
quarterly report regarding the status of major acquisition 
programs.

                    FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    The Federal Aviation Administration traces its origins to 
the Air Commerce Act of 1926, but more recently to the Federal 
Aviation Act of 1958 which established the independent Federal 
Aviation Agency from functions which had resided in the Airways 
Modernization Board, the Civil Aeronautics Administration, and 
parts of the Civil Aeronautics Board. FAA became an 
administration of the Department of Transportation on April 1, 
1967, pursuant to the Department of Transportation Act (October 
15, 1966).
    The total recommended program level for the FAA for fiscal 
year 2003 amounts to $13,586,225,000, $4,000,000 more than the 
President's budget request. The following table summarizes the 
Committee's recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                               2002 enacted     2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                     \1\            estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations...................................................        6,893,567        7,077,203        7,081,203
    General fund appropriation...............................        1,112,481        3,277,925        3,281,925
    Trust fund appropriation.................................        5,773,519        3,799,278        3,799,278
    Aviation user fees.......................................            7,567  ...............  ...............
Facilities and equipment.....................................        2,914,000        2,981,022        2,981,022
Research, engineering, and development.......................          195,000          124,000          124,000
Grants-in-Aid for Airports...................................        3,300,000        3,400,000        3,400,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total available budget resources.......................       13,302,567       13,582,225       13,586,225
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect rescissions and reductions pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and 107-117, nor supplemental
  appropriations pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accurals.

                               Operations

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................  $6,886,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   7,077,203,000
Committee recommendation................................   7,081,203,000

\1\ Does not reflect TASC reductions of $2,820,000 pursuant to Public 
Law 107-87 and Public Law 107-117, nor supplemental appropriations of 
$200,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117 or $7,567,000 in aviation 
user fees.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    FAA's ``Operations'' appropriation provides funds for the 
operation, maintenance, communications, and logistic support of 
the air traffic control and navigation systems and activities. 
It also covers the administration and management of the 
regulatory, commercial space, medical, engineering, and 
development programs.
    The bill includes $3,799,278,000 for the operations 
activities of the Federal Aviation Administration from the 
airport and airway trust fund. The balance of the operations 
appropriation will come from the general fund.
    As in past years, FAA is directed to report immediately to 
the Committees on Appropriations in the event resources are 
insufficient to operate a safe and effective air traffic 
control system.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendation in comparison to the budget estimate:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                           2002 program        2003 budget         Committee
                                                            level \1\         estimate \2\      recommendations
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Air traffic services..................................          5,446,872          5,697,537           5,696,037
Aviation regulation and certification.................            767,649            833,967             839,467
Civil aviation security...............................            149,605  ..................  .................
Research and acquisitions.............................            195,559            207,600             207,600
Commercial space transportation.......................             12,416             12,325              12,325
Regional coordination.................................             85,735             82,192              82,192
Human resources.......................................             69,282             80,260              80,260
Financial services....................................             50,178             48,782              48,782
Staff offices.........................................            108,704             84,890              84,890
Information Services..................................  .................             29,650              29,650
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
      Total...........................................          6,886,000          7,077,203           7,081,203
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect TASC reductions of $2,820,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and Public Law 107-117, nor
  supplemental appropriations of $200,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    Contract tower program.--The Committee continues to support 
the contract tower program and the cost-sharing program as a 
cost-effective way to enhance air traffic safety at smaller 
airports. The Committee's recommendation includes $78,000,000 
to fund the existing contract tower program, the remaining 
eligible non-Federal towers not currently operated by the FAA, 
and other non-towered airports eligible for the program. In 
addition to these resources, the Committee has provided 
$6,000,000 for the contract tower cost-sharing program.
    Medallion Program.--The Committee recommendation includes 
$1,500,000 to continue support for this Government and industry 
cooperative program to improve rural air safety in Alaska. The 
Medallion program has been overwhelmed with applications, and 
this funding will allow an expansion of the program beyond its 
original operating plan.
    Alien Species Action Plan (ASAP).--The Committee provides 
$3,000,000 out of available funds to continue the 
implementation of the Alien Species Action Plan which was 
adopted by the FAA as part of its August 26, 1998 Record of 
Decision approving certain improvements at Kahului Airport on 
the Island of Maui. These funds will be used to complete 
capital projects that were started in fiscal year 2002 and 
continue the operational requirements imposed by the ASAP.
    Personnel Reform.--In the Conference Report on the 
Transportation and Related Agencies Appropriations for 2002, 
the Conferees directed the Administrator to report to the House 
and Senate Committees on how the agency had implemented and/or 
it plans to implement a Senate directive regarding personnel 
reform.
    The Senate directive referred to Senate Report 107-38, 
Department of Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations for 2002, that expressed the Committee's concern 
over the failure of the agency to implement a ratified 
agreement with the American Federation of State, County and 
Municipal Employees and instructed the agency to implement the 
ratified agreement immediately.
    Both the Committee and the Conferees expected that the 
personnel reform directive would be followed so that the agency 
could achieve the improved productivity gains negotiated by the 
agency. Since the agency was unresponsive to the Senate 
directive and continued to obstruct implementation of the 
agreement, the Committee expects the Administrator to 
immediately implement the ratified agreement and instructs the 
agency to do so.
    National airspace redesign.--Of the funds provided for the 
activity, $8,500,000 shall be for the NY/NJ Airspace Redesign 
effort and shall not be reprogrammed by the FAA for other 
activities, including airspace redesign activities outside the 
NY/NJ metro area. As the FAA moves forward with its redesign 
program in the New York/New Jersey and Philadelphia area, the 
Committee encourages the FAA, where appropriate, to consider 
air noise impacts as part of the redesign effort.
    Spaceport licensing procedures.--The Committee is aware 
that the State of Oklahoma has a variety of locations that are 
ideal for orbital launches dues to low population density and 
existing infrastructure. As such, the State of Oklahoma has 
been working to develop a spaceport. The Committee strongly 
encourages the FAA Administrator to provide the necessary 
technical assistance and financial resources to assist with the 
licensing procedures for this potential spaceport.
    Non-precision GPS approaches.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $5,000,000 to continue with the work associated with 
increasing the number of non-precision GPS instrument 
approaches developed and published for airports that are not 
Part 139 certificated. Of these funds, $1,500,000 is only for 
the Office of Regulation and Certification (AVR) to develop 
advisory materials and policy guidelines for the general 
aviation community.
    Inspector technical training.--In March, 2002, the FAA 
released the results of a study which evaluated the commercial 
airplane certification process. One of the major findings of 
the study is that the FAA, airlines and aircraft manufacturers 
have not adequately communicated important safety information 
within and among their organizations. The study also concluded 
that proper training and adequate hands-on experience are 
essential to ensure that safety inspectors identify potential 
safety hazards. The Committee has provided $4,000,000 more than 
the President's request to provide additional technical 
training for FAA's aviation safety inspectors as the agency 
moves forward with the implementation of its Operational 
Evolution Plan (OEP). Specifically, the additional funding will 
provide necessary training for inspectors in order to properly 
certify pilots and aircraft in the Reduced Vertical Separation 
Minimums. The Committee also encourages the FAA to develop a 
plan to improve the coordination and communication process 
between the FAA's flight standards and aircraft certification 
offices.

                        Facilities and Equipment


                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................  $2,914,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   2,981,022,000
Committee recommendation................................   2,981,022,000

\1\ Does not reflect $108,500,000 of supplemental appropriations 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117 or rescission of $15,000,000 of 
unobligated balances pursuant to Public Law 107-87.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    Under the ``Facilities and equipment'' appropriation, 
safety, capacity and efficiency of the Federal airway system 
are improved by the procurement and installation of new 
equipment and the construction and modernization of facilities 
to keep pace with aeronautical activity and in accordance with 
the Federal Aviation Administration's comprehensive capital 
investment plan [CIP], formerly called the national airspace 
system [NAS] plan.
    The Federal Aviation Administration's most recent estimate 
is that it will spend approximately $41,901,000,000 on the Air 
Traffic Control Modernization effort from 1981 through 2004.
    The bill includes an appropriation of $2,981,022,000 for 
the facilities and equipment of the Federal Aviation 
Administration. The Committee's recommended distributions of 
the funds for each of the major accounts are as follows:

                                            FACILITIES AND EQUIPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                         Program name                            2002 enacted    2003 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Activity 1, Improve Aviation Safety:
    Reduce Commercial Aviation Fatalities:
        Terminal Business Unit...............................     $160,355,000     $141,000,000     $161,300,000
        Aviation Weather Services Improvements...............       22,520,000       23,440,000       23,440,000
        Low Level Windshear Alert System (LLWAS)--Upgrade....        1,533,000        1,600,000        1,600,000
        Aviation Safety Analysis System (ASAS)...............       22,100,000       21,700,000       21,700,000
        Integrated Flight Quality Assurance..................        2,000,000          500,000          500,000
        Safety Performance Analysis System (SPAS)............        2,100,000        2,100,000        2,100,000
        Performance Enhancement Systems (PENS)...............        2,500,000        2,600,000        2,600,000
        Aviation Weather Services Improvements (CWIS)........        5,000,000  ...............  ...............
    Reduce General Aviation Fatalities: Safe Flight 21.......       39,300,000       29,800,000       32,800,000
    Other Aviation Safety Programs:
        Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping......       55,991,000       41,100,000       41,600,000
        Aircraft Related Equipment Program...................        7,500,000       16,000,000       16,000,000
        National Aviation Safety Data Analysis Center                1,800,000        2,000,000        2,000,000
         (NASDAC)............................................
        Explosive Detection Technology.......................       97,500,000      121,500,000       55,000,000
        Aircraft Fleet Modernization.........................        1,500,000  ...............  ...............
        Volcano Monitoring...................................        2,000,000  ...............        3,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 1..................................      423,699,000      403,340,000      363,640,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 2, Improve the Efficiency of the Air Traffic Control
 System:
    Increase the Number of Flights Handled by Airports:
        Terminal Business Unit...............................      490,518,059      551,035,496      534,601,496
        Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) Applications............       38,113,200       33,200,000       29,700,000
        Free Flight Phase 2..................................       69,900,000      106,200,000       96,200,000
        Air Traffic Management (ATM).........................       49,300,000       13,000,000       13,000,000
        Free Flight Phase 1..................................      122,570,000       39,900,000       39,900,000
        Automated Surface Observing System (ASOS)............       13,280,000       12,100,000       12,100,000
    Improve Routing Efficiency for Flights En Route:
        Next Generation VHF Air/Ground Communications System        34,950,000       71,100,000       71,100,000
         (NEXCOM)............................................
        En Route Automation Program..........................       46,200,000       71,050,000       75,250,000
        Weather and Radar Processor (WARP)...................       24,171,000       13,600,000       13,600,000
        Long Range Radar Sustainment.........................  ...............  ...............        7,500,000
    Improve Overall NAS Efficiency:
        Air Traffic Operations Management System (ATOMS).....        1,000,000        1,100,000        1,100,000
        NAS Management Automation Program (NASMAP)...........        1,100,000        1,900,000        1,900,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 2..................................      891,102,259      914,185,496      895,951,496
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 3, Increase Capacity of the NAS:
    Increase Capability of En Route Systems to Handle
     Flights:
        Navigation and Landing Aids..........................      272,589,200      249,800,000      295,735,000
        Oceanic Automation System............................       88,100,000       87,400,000       76,349,000
        Gulf of Mexico Offshore Program......................        6,900,000        2,300,000        2,300,000
        Voice Switching and Control System (VSCS)............       16,000,000       14,000,000       14,000,000
        Transponder Landing System...........................        6,000,000  ...............       12,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 3..................................      389,589,200      353,500,000      400,384,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 4, Improve Reliability of the NAS:
    Replace Terminal Equipment to Prevent Decreased
     Performance:
        Guam CERAP--Relocate.................................        6,400,000        5,000,000        5,000,000
        Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR)/Enhanced           20,000,000        6,200,000       17,200,000
         Terminal Voice Switch...............................
        Airport Cable Loop Systems--Sustained Support........        4,000,000        4,000,000        5,500,000
    Replace En Route Equipment to Prevent Decreased
     Performance:
        En Route Automation Program..........................      155,863,000      142,800,000      147,500,000
        ARTCC Building Improvements/Plant Improvements.......       44,000,000       40,200,000       40,200,000
        Air Traffic Management (ATM).........................       24,500,000       24,500,000       24,500,000
    Replace Supporting Systems that Impact Overall NAS
     Performance:
        Critical Telecommunications Support..................        1,900,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
        FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI)..........       39,000,000       46,600,000       46,600,000
        Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure.............       30,700,000       22,800,000       22,800,000
        Voice Recorder Replacement Program (VRRP)............        6,000,000        3,300,000        3,300,000
        NAS Infrastructure Management System (NIMS)..........       16,000,000       29,100,000       29,100,000
        Flight Service Station (FSS) Modernization...........        4,700,000        5,700,000        5,700,000
        FSAS Operational and Supportability Implementation          33,943,000       19,710,000       19,710,000
         System (OASIS)......................................
        Weather Message Switching Center Replacement (WMSCR).        2,500,000        2,000,000        2,000,000
        Flight Service Station Switch Modernization..........       10,000,000       13,200,000       13,200,000
        Alaskan NAS Interfacility Communications System              4,000,000        2,900,000        4,000,000
         (ANICS).............................................
        Electrical Power Systems--Sustain/Support............       54,200,000       50,700,000       50,700,000
        NAS Recovery Communications (RCOM)...................        4,800,000        9,400,000        9,400,000
        Aeronautical Center Infrastructure Modernization.....       12,000,000       11,700,000       11,700,000
        Frequency and Spectrum Engineering...................        3,000,000        2,600,000        2,600,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 4..................................      453,006,000      443,410,000      461,710,000
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 5, Improve the Efficiency of Mission Support:
    Increase Efficiency of Investment Management:
        NAS Improvement of System Support Laboratory.........        2,300,000        2,700,000        2,700,000
        Technical Center Facilities..........................       10,250,000       12,000,000       12,000,000
        William J. Hughes Technical Center Infrastructure            2,900,000        3,000,000        3,000,000
         Sustainment.........................................
        En Route Communications and Control Facilities               1,540,280        1,057,953        1,307,953
         Improvements........................................
        DOD/FAA Facilities Transfer..........................        2,800,000        1,200,000        3,200,000
        Terminal Communications--Improve.....................          936,700        1,249,299        1,249,299
        Flight Service Facilities Improvement................        1,202,100        1,223,235        1,223,235
        Navigation and Landing Aids--Improve.................        2,525,361        5,034,017        5,034,017
        FAA Buildings and Equipment..........................       11,700,000       11,000,000       11,000,000
        Air Navigational Aids and ATC Facilities (Local Proj-        2,000,000        2,100,000        2,100,000
          ects)..............................................
        Computer Aided Engineering and Graphics (CAEG)               2,600,000        2,800,000        2,800,000
         Modernization.......................................
        Information Technology Integration...................        1,500,000        1,600,000        1,600,000
        Operational Data Management System (ODMS)............        3,000,000       10,300,000       10,300,000
        Logistics Support Systems and Facilities (LSSF)......        5,000,000        9,300,000        5,000,000
        Test Equipment--Maintenance Support for Replace-               900,000        1,700,000        1,700,000
         ment................................................
        Facility Security Risk Management....................       22,400,000       37,300,000       37,300,000
        Information Security.................................       13,600,000       13,291,000       13,291,000
        Distance Learning....................................        1,300,000        1,300,000        1,300,000
        National Airspace System (NAS) Training Facilities...  ...............        2,300,000        2,300,000
        System Engineering and Development Support...........       26,300,000       25,800,000       25,800,000
        Program Support Leases...............................       35,500,000       38,400,000       38,400,000
        Logistics Support Services (LSS).....................        7,200,000        7,500,000        7,500,000
        Mike Monroney Aeronautical Center--Leases............       14,600,000       14,600,000       14,600,000
        In-Plant NAS Contract Support Services...............        2,800,000        2,900,000        2,900,000
        Transition Engineering Support.......................       38,300,000       39,000,000       37,000,000
        FAA Corporate Systems Architecture...................        1,000,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
        Technical Support Services Contract (TSSC)...........       45,800,000       46,700,000       44,700,000
        Resource Tracking Program (RTP)......................        4,000,000        3,700,000        2,500,000
        Center for Advanced Aviation System Development......       81,543,000       81,364,000       81,364,000
        Operational Evolution Plan (OEP).....................        1,000,000        1,000,000        1,000,000
    Minimize Environmental Impact of Aviation Facilities:
        NAS Facilities OSHA and Environmental Standards             28,400,000       32,600,000       32,600,000
         Compliance..........................................
        Fuel Storage Tank Replacement and Monitoring.........        9,300,000        8,500,000        8,500,000
        Hazardous Materials Management.......................       21,700,000       20,500,000       20,500,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
          Total, Activity 5..................................      404,897,441      444,019,504      436,769,504
                                                              ==================================================
Activity 6, Personnel Compensation, Benefits and Travel:
    Personnel and Related Expenses...........................      377,100,000      422,567,000      422,567,000
    Account-wide adjustment..................................      -25,393,900  ...............  ...............
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total, All Activities..................................    2,914,000,000    2,981,022,000    2,981,022,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY

    Safety and Security Activities.--The Committee recommends 
$6,000,000 for additional aviation safety and security 
activities within FAA's terminal business unit in activity one. 
Within the funds provided, the Committee provides $500,000 for 
specialized training to fight and prevent aircraft fires at the 
Rocky Mountain Emergency Services Training Center; $500,000 for 
aviation security systems upgrades at Daniel Webster College; 
and, $5,000,000 to an aviation security and science center at 
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University.
    Advanced Technology Development and Prototyping.--The 
Committee provides $41,600,000 for the advanced development and 
prototyping program which is $500,000 more than the President's 
budget request. The Committee is aware of a potentially cost 
effective technology called the Runway Obstruction Warning 
System (ROWS). The Committee has included $500,000 to further 
test and develop this technology at the Gulfport-Biloxi 
Airport. Also included within the funds provided is $2,000,000 
for the airfield improvement program authorized under section 
905 of Public Law 106-181. The recommended funding level 
includes $5,500,000 to continue the wind profiling and weather 
research activities at Juneau, Alaska.
    Explosives Detection Technology.--The administration's 
budget for FAA ``Facilities and Equipment'' includes 
$124,000,000 for Explosives Detection Technology of which 
$2,500,000 is for personnel and support costs. Funds for 
Explosive Detection Technology were provided in fiscal year 
2002 under both the Department of Transportation and Department 
of Defense Appropriations bills. Requested funds for fiscal 
year 2003 will be used for the deployment of FAA certified 
Explosive Detection Systems as well as Threat Image Projection 
Systems, Explosive Trace Detection Devices and Computer-Based 
Training Platforms. Though this funding has been requested 
within the FAA budget, the administration's budget request 
assumes that these funds will be transferred to the 
Transportation Security Administration. The Committee has fully 
funded this activity through a combination of $55,000,000 made 
available in the Facilities and Equipment appropriation and 
$69,000,000 in transfer funds from other capital accounts in 
the bill (Sec. 351). Together, the $124,000,000 is transferred 
in the bill to the Transportation Security Administration.
    Safe Flight 21.--The Committee recommends $32,800,000 for 
Safe Flight 21, which is $3,000,000 more than the budget 
request. The Committee is encouraged by the success of the 
Capstone initiative and has provided additional funding to 
accelerate deployment of the Capstone infrastructure in 
Southeastern Alaska. The Committee continues to believe that 
Safe Flight 21 technologies show promise of reducing runway 
incursions. As the program proceeds, attention should be given 
to how this program could promote safer ground traffic at 
airports and how ADS-B and other technologies could be used to 
address the runway incursion problem.
    Volcano Monitor.--The Committee recommendation provides 
$3,000,000 to extend the aviation safety benefits of the 
seismic monitoring network to remote areas.
    Airport Surface Detection Equipment (ASDE-X).--The 
Committee provides $104,600,000 for the Airport Surface 
Detection Equipment (ASDE-X) program. The amount provided is 
$14,300,000 more than the administration's request. The ASDE-X 
program will improve runway safety and prevent runway incursion 
accidents by improving airport controller situational 
awareness. This is achieved by providing visual representation 
of the traffic situation on the airport surface to the 
controller in the form of aircraft position information, flight 
call signs, and by alerting controllers through aural and 
visual alarms that a potential accident may occur. The amount 
provided above the administration's request will fund the 
development of new multi-lateration capability for deployment 
at the following high volume ASDE-3 sites: Memphis, Tennessee; 
Louisville, Kentucky; St. Louis, Missouri; Dallas, Texas; 
Chicago, Illinois; Los Angeles, California; and Atlanta, 
Georgia.

        IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF THE AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM

    New York Integrated Control Complex.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $5,000,000 to plan and develop a 
facility needed to integrate the New York Air Traffic Control 
Center and TRACON, which are currently located 20 miles apart 
in outdated facilities. This integration is critical because 
the New York-New Jersey airspace, the most congested in the 
United States, is currently inefficiently managed due to the 
fact that controllers in separate locations must communicate by 
telephone under extremely trying circumstances. As a result, 
the controllers must be extremely cautious when moving planes 
in and out of the airspace. The result is often costly and 
exorbitant delays, which in turn generate potential safety 
vulnerabilities.
    Aeronautical Information and Flight Planning Enhancements 
(AIFPE).--Within the En Route Automation Program, the Committee 
has provided an additional $4,200,000 for Aeronautical 
Information and Flight Planning Enhancements. This additional 
funding will provide for new development of hand-off capability 
between Canada, the United States and Mexico. At present, this 
procedure is currently done manually. The Committee believes 
that automating this process will enhance both the safety and 
efficiency of controlled aircraft within North America.
    Automated surface observing system.--The Committee's 
recommendation includes $12,100,000 for the automated surface 
observing system program as requested in the President's 
budget. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes 
$500,000 to implement an automated weather sensor system at the 
Driggs-Reed Memorial Airport in Idaho Falls, ID.
    Long Range Radar Sustainment (LRRS).--The Committee has 
provided $7,500,000 for Long Range Radar Sustainment. The 
amount provided is the same as that provided in the recently 
enacted Supplemental Appropriations bill of fiscal year 2002. 
Together these funds will provide for a $15,000,000 sustainment 
program for the ARSR-4 radar systems located on the perimeter 
of the United States. While these radars were scheduled to be 
decommissioned prior to the events of September 11th, it is now 
apparent both to the FAA and Department of Defense that these 
aging radars must remain in operation.
    Free flight phase two.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $96,200,000 for Free Flight Phase II activities. The 
recommendation is $26,300,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level and $10,000,000 less than the budget estimate. 
Within the available funds, the Committee has provided full 
funding for the User Request Evaluation Tool (URET).
    Aeronautical Data Link (ADL) Applications.--The Committee 
has reduced the budget request for Aeronautical Data Link 
Applications to $29,700,000 which is $3,500,000 lower than the 
budget request. The Aeronautical Data Link program is designed 
to provide data link applications between ground and airborne 
automation systems. This program is designed to reduce voice 
congestion as well as grant pilots direct access to weather and 
air traffic control information while reducing voice 
communication errors. Recently FAA officials have encountered 
technical software development challenges in certifying the en 
route controller/pilot data link (CPDLC) system. As such, the 
FAA has postponed the deployment of the CPDLC system by roughly 
2 years. The funds reduced from the budget request include 
$2,000,000 from the CPDLC Build II project; $500,000 from the 
Flight Information Service Data Link program; and, $1,000,000 
from the CPDLC Decision Support System Services.
    Airport surveillance radar (ASR-11).--The Committee has 
provided $90,000,000 for the Airport Surveillance Radar (ASR-
11) program. The amount provided is $33,400,000 less than the 
budget request. The new ASR-11 radar is expected to provide 
digital radar data necessary to interface with new automation 
systems, such as the Standard Terminal Automation Replacement 
System (STARS). The FAA expects to procure this radar as part 
of a larger contract vehicle managed by the United States Air 
Force. Due to concerns over delivery delays and the performance 
of this radar, the FAA ordered that the ASR-11 vendor provide 
its final system for the development, test, and evaluation 
phase at the end of calendar year 2001. That date was then 
slipped until March of 2002. The FAA and the Air Force have 
been conducting such testing individually. It appears that 
certain problems with the radar's performance may persist, 
including the appearance of false targets on the radar screen 
in numbers that exceed the agency's specification. The FAA, 
like the Air Force, is now bringing the radar into operational 
testing to determine whether these and other problems can be 
resolved in the operational environment. The Committee will 
monitor the progress of this program carefully. Given the 
testing delays already encountered and the uncertainty that 
surrounds the next round of testing, the Committee has reduced 
funding for the program below the requested level.
    Radar at Gallatin Airport.--The Committee is concerned 
about potential safety risks associated with the lack of radar 
coverage at Gallatin Airport, Montana, an airport whose 
enplanements and operations are growing. The Committee directs 
the administrator to conduct a site survey for the installation 
of the appropriate radar at the airport.
    Precision runway monitor (PRM).--The Committee has provided 
a total of $18,000,000 for the procurement of three precision 
runway monitors (PRMs). This rapid update special purpose radar 
system enables aircraft to approach the airport in dual arrival 
streams with shorter separation distances and in deteriorating 
weather conditions. The vendor of this technology has offered 
to extend the existing price of PRM units, making it possible 
for the FAA to achieve substantial savings for the taxpayer 
through a three-unit purchase. The Committee expects the FAA to 
initiate a procurement of three systems, with the expectation 
that systems will be installed at Hartsfield International 
Airport, Detroit Metropolitan-Wayne County Airport, and one 
other site to be determined. Within the amount provided, 
sufficient funds are made available for the installation of a 
PRM already under contract at Cleveland Hopkins International 
Airport. The Committee believes that this installation will 
better ensure that the full capacity benefits of new runway 6L/
24R will be realized.
    Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities--Replace.--The 
Committee recommendation provides $103,566,000 for this 
program. The recommendation provides funding for the following 
projects:

                  Fiscal Year 2003 Terminal Air Traffic

Pago Pago, American Samoa...............................        $175,000
Baltimore, MD...........................................       2,088,581
Chantilly, VA...........................................         600,000
Deer Valley, AZ.........................................         803,196
Memphis, TN.............................................       1,147,000
Portland, OR (TRACON)...................................       5,500,000
Dallas, TX (Addison)....................................       5,700,000
Reno, NV................................................       8,349,000
Fort Wayne, IN..........................................       3,539,000
Newport News, VA........................................       6,400,000
La Guardia, NY..........................................       9,460,000
St. Louis, MO (TRACON)..................................       1,500,000
Corpus Christi, TX......................................         700,000
Beaumont, TX............................................       1,000,000
Seattle, WA (ATCT)......................................         550,000
Salina, KS..............................................         500,000
Newark, NJ..............................................       3,000,000
Pt. Columbus, OH........................................       2,100,000
Grand Canyon, AZ........................................         255,898
Savannah, GA............................................         919,190
Newburgh, NY............................................       2,065,000
Richmond, VA............................................         550,000
Vero Beach, FL..........................................         878,775
Everett, WA.............................................         925,000
Roanoke, VA.............................................         550,000
Merrimack, NH (BCT).....................................       4,700,000
Seattle, WA (TRACON)....................................       4,782,701
Phoenix, AZ.............................................      14,107,919
Manchester, NH..........................................         943,609
Wilkes Barre, PA........................................       2,000,000
Topeka, KS..............................................       1,690,131
Billings, MT............................................       2,120,000
Missoula, MT............................................       2,000,000
Provo, UT...............................................         666,000
Albuquerque, NM.........................................       1,800,000
Columbus, MS............................................       1,500,000
Las Vegas, NV...........................................       3,000,000
Columbia, SC............................................       1,000,000
Reno, NV (TRACON).......................................       4,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
    Total...............................................     103,566,000

    Oakland Tower Replacement.--The Committee has reduced the 
request for Terminal Air Traffic Control Facilities Replacement 
by $19,000,000. This reduction is attributable to the deletion 
of funding for the replacement of the air traffic control tower 
at Oakland, California. Based on the FAA's newly updated 
contracting schedule, the agency will not be able to contract 
for this tower within fiscal year 2003.
    Notams Graphics.--The Committee directs the FAA to expand 
the use of graphics to not only flight service stations by also 
to provide pilots with advisory graphics of information 
contained in the NOTAMs including temporary flight 
restrictions. It is important that graphics on Special Use 
Airspace also be made available, and the Committee believes 
that advisory graphics can be conveyed through the Direct User 
Access Terminal System and other sources, including the 
internet.

                      INCREASE CAPACITY OF THE NAS

    Navigation and landing aids.--The Committee provides a 
total of $307,735,000 to modernize the FAA's navigation and 
landing aids systems which is $57,935,000 more than the 
President's budget request. Within the funds provided, the 
Committee includes $1,500,000 for navigation aids and equipment 
at the Nikolski Airport; $4,000,000 for navigation and landing 
improvements at the Cincinnati Northern Kentucky International 
Airport; $4,000,000 for navigation and landing improvements for 
Lambert-St. Louis International Airport; and, $800,000 for 
remote transmitter receivers at Las Vegas-McCarran 
International Airport.
    Wide Area Augmentation System (WAAS).--The Committee 
continues to be concerned about the diminishing return on 
investment expected from the deployment of the Wide Area 
Augmentation System as well as the accuracy of the FAA's budget 
for this program during consideration of the fiscal year 2002 
Appropriations bill. The administrator submitted a special 
request for funding to obtain a third geo-stationary satellite 
to support the WAAS signal. The Committee funded this special 
request but the FAA has now informed the Committee that the 
initiative, as so many others within the WAAS program, will be 
delayed. The FAA has now decided to execute a competitive 
contract for this satellite communications service. This has 
resulted in a diminished requirement for funds in fiscal year 
2003. As a result, the Committee has lowered funding for the 
WAAS program to $98,900,000, a reduction of $11,600,000 from 
the budget request.
    Loran-C Upgrade/Modernization.--Within the funds provided 
for navigation and landing aids, the Committee includes 
$21,000,000 for Loran-C upgrades and modernizations.
    Instrument Landing System (ILS)--Establish/upgrade.--The 
Committee recommendation provides $36,180,000 and directs the 
increase above the budget request to be distributed as follows:

Mena Intermountain Municipal Airport, AR................     $580,000.00
Winder-Barrow Airport, GA...............................    4,000,000.00
Olive Branch Airport, MS................................      600,000.00
Reno-Stead Airport, NV..................................    1,500,000.00
Pangborn Memorial Airport, WA...........................    1,500,000.00
Wasilla Airport, AK.....................................    1,000,000.00
Stuttgart Municipal Airport, AR.........................    2,000,000.00
Talladega Municipal Airport, AL.........................    1,500,000.00

    Transponder Landing System (TLS).--The Committee 
recommendation provides $12,000,000 an increase of $6,000,000 
over the fiscal year 2002 appropriated level to acquire and 
site TLS units. The Committee directs the FAA to conduct 
surveys and cost benefit analysis for TLS deployments with the 
appropriated funding at the following locations:

Driggs-Reed Memorial and Sandpoint, ID..................   $4,000,000.00
William H. Morse Airport, Bennington VT.................    2,000,000.00
Elko and Minden-Tahoe Airports, NV......................    4,000,000.00
La Grand/Union County Airport, OR.......................    2,000,000.00

    Approach Lighting System Improvement (ALSIP).--The 
Committee recommendation provides $29,755,000 for the 
procurement and deployment of runway lighting system to 
facilitate improved and precision landing capabilities at 
various airports. The Committee directs funding to be allocated 
to the airports listed below as follows:

Auburn-Opelika R.G. Pitts Airport, AL (MALSR)...........   $1,500,000.00
Reno/Tahoe International Airport, NV (MALSR)............    2,400,000.00
Baton Rouge Municipal Airport, LA (MALSR)...............      750,000.00
Cleveland Hopkins Int'l, Runway 24L (MALSR).............      400,000.00
Alaska statewide rural airport lighting.................   11,000,000.00
North Little Rock Municipal, AR (MALSR).................      450,000.00

    In addition, the Committee provides $6,000,000 to reduce 
the backlog of MALSR systems that are awaiting installation and 
$4,000,000 to procure additional systems.
    Advanced technology and oceanic procedures.--The Committee 
has been supportive of the need to improve the capability of 
air traffic services over the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and 
has been concerned about delays and difficulties the FAA has 
experienced in the past with the Advanced Technologies and 
Oceanic Procedures (ATOP) procurement. Although considered a 
non-developmental acquisition, it was determined after the 
contract was awarded in June, 2001, that the amount of 
essential software to be developed and tested was severely 
underestimated. Due to the additional complexity, delays in 
software development continue to plague the procurement, and 
the factory-level acceptance testing which was scheduled to be 
completed in September, 2002, is slipping. The Committee urges 
the FAA to aggressively manage this procurement and deletes 
$11,051,000 in anticipation of the cascading effect software 
development problems will have on the delivery of the first 
system.

                     IMPROVE RELIABILITY OF THE NAS

    Airport cable loop systems.--The Committee recommendation 
provides $5,500,000 to continue FAA's efforts to upgrade and 
replace deteriorated cable of the surveillance and landing 
communications systems within the National Airspace System. 
Within the request provided is $1,500,000 for a fiber optic 
loop around Las Vegas-McCarran International Airport.
    Flight service station switch modernization.--The Committee 
has included $13,200,000 for the flight service station switch 
modernization program as requested in the budget request. This 
modernization program will replace 65 voice switching systems 
at Automated Flight Service Stations and provide eight small 
tower voice switches for the non-automated Flight Service 
Stations in the Alaskan region. The Committee believes it would 
be prudent for the FAA to deploy the switches consistent with 
its OASIS implementation plan. At the same time, the Committee 
cautions FAA not to use this direction as a reason to delay the 
implementation of the OASIS system.
    Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR)/Enhanced Terminal 
Voice Switch (ETVS).--The Committee provides $17,200,000 for 
the Terminal Voice Switch Replacement (TVSR) program. This 
modernization program is designed to replace 421 electro-
mechanical and non-supportable electronic voice pitching 
systems. The amount provide over the budget request will be 
used for the following activities: $3,000,000 will be used for 
additional conferencing capability to improve interagency 
coordination during periods of security vulnerabilities which 
was identified by the FAA after the events of September 11th, 
2001; and, $8,000,000 will be used to increase substantially 
the number of ETVS/RDVS units procured in 2003.
    Alaska NAS Interfacility Comm System (ANICS).--The 
Committee recommendation includes $4,000,000. This is 
$1,100,000 more than the requested level of funding and is the 
same level appropriated in fiscal year 2002. With this amount, 
sufficient funding has been provided to begin installation at a 
second Phase II site this year.
    Initial Academy Training System (IANTS).--Within the En 
Route Automation Program, the Committee has provided 
$16,900,000 over and above the budget request for the Initial 
Academy Training System program (IATS). These additional funds 
will provide a standardized Display System Replacement (DSR) 
training platform at the FAA Academy located in Oklahoma City, 
OK. At present, newly hired air traffic controllers train at 
the academy on outdated M-1 consoles and do not receive any 
training on the standardized Display System Replacement 
platform until they arrive at an Air Route Traffic Control 
Center (ARTCC). These additional funds will be critical to the 
training of what is expected to be an increased number of new 
recruits to replace controllers entering retirement.
    En Route Automation Program.--The Committee has reduced the 
funding requested for the En Route Automation Program by 
$12,200,000. This reduction is attributable to a level of 
unobligated balances that continue to mount in the En Route 
Communications Gateway program. Over a 3 year period between 
fiscal year 2000 and 2002, the Committee has appropriated 
$104,700,000 for the Eunomia/ECG Program. The FAA has re-scoped 
this program, which is designed to replace the Peripheral 
Adapter Module Replacement Item (PAMRI) equipment, to meet 
other critical needs as determined by the FAA's Air Traffic 
Services office. Due to the delays associated with the 
rescoping of the ECG program, it is anticipated that the 
program will have an unobligated balance of $12,200,000 
entering fiscal year 2003. The Committee has adjusted the 
fiscal year 2003 budget request to account for this unobligated 
balance.
    FAA Telecommunications Infrastructure (FTI).--The Committee 
has provided $46,600,000 for FAA's Telecommunications 
Infrastructure (FTI). The amount provided is the same as the 
budget request. The FTI Program is intended to improve 
telecommunications services within the FAA's NAS and non-NAS 
infrastructures. The current incumbent provider of these 
services is WorldCom. Given the recent financial troubles 
besetting this company, the Committee is concerned with the 
company's ability to continue to provide critical 
telecommunications services for the nation's air traffic 
control infrastructure. While the FAA has now awarded the new 
FTI contract to another vendor, WorldCom recently signed a 5-
year bridge contract to provide for a transition period between 
WorldCom and the new provider. The Committee is concerned about 
WorldCom's ability to perform all elements of the 5-year bridge 
contract. As such, the Committee directs that the administrator 
develop a contingency plan for the continuation of 
telecommunications services in the event that WorldCom is 
incapable of fulfilling its contract obligations. The Committee 
expects the administrator to coordinate with the Office of the 
Inspector General in the development of this contingency plan.
    Air/Ground Communications Infrastructure.--Within the funds 
provided for air/ground communications infrastructure, the 
Committee has included $3,000,000 to develop and test a 
prototype capability to transmit critical flight data from 
aircraft to ground station using currently installed data 
management and communications equipment.

               IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF MISSION SUPPORT

    DOD/FAA facilities transfer.--The Committee recommends 
$3,200,000, including $2,000,000 for the Lawton/Fort Sill 
Regional Airport ARAC (Airport Radar Approach Control).
    En route communications and control facilities 
improvements.--The Committee provides $1,307,953 for en route 
communications and control facilities improvements, which is 
$250,000 more than the President's budget. Within the amount 
provided, the Committee includes $250,000 for a remote 
communications outlet at Keokuk, IA Airport.
    Asset Support Chain Management (ASCM).--The Committee has 
provided $5,000,000 for the Logistics Support Systems and 
Facilities activity. This program will provide a single 
integrated planning, inventory, and asset management solution 
to improve the FAA's performance, financial, and logistics 
information systems. The amount provided is $4,300,000 less 
than the budget request. This reduction is attributable to the 
slippage in a number of programmed elements.
    Transition Engineering Support.--The Committee has provided 
$37,000,000 for Transition Engineering Support. This program 
supports the NAS Implementation Support Contract (NISC). The 
amount provided is $2,000,000 less than the budget request and 
the Committee believes that this slight reduction can be easily 
accommodated without any significant impact on the agency's 
overall NAS modernization effort.
    Technical Services Support Contract (TSSC).--The Committee 
has provided $44,700,000 for the Technical Services Support 
Contract. The amount provided is $2,000,000 less than the level 
in the budget request. This adjustment is attributable to 
savings adjusted by the FAA resulting from the transition from 
a new TSSC contract the reduction is expected to have no impact 
on system performance.
    Resource Tracking Program (RTP).--The Committee has 
provided a total of $2,500,000 for the Resource Tracking 
Program. This amount is $1,200,000 less than the budget 
request. This reduction will result in the deferral of software 
maintenance upgrades. However, this deferral should in no way 
undermine the FAA's ability to improve the integrity of its 
internal budgeting processes.

                 Research, Engineering, and Development


                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................    $195,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................     124,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     124,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect $50,000,000 of supplemental appropriations pursuant 
to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    This appropriation finances research, engineering, and 
development programs to improve the national air traffic 
control system by increasing its safety, security, 
productivity, and capacity. The programs are designed to meet 
the expected air traffic demands of the future and to promote 
flight safety. The major objectives are to keep the current 
system operating safely and efficiently; to protect the 
environment; and to modernize the system through improvements 
in facilities, equipment, techniques, and procedures in order 
to insure that the system will safely and efficiently handle 
the volume of aircraft traffic expected to materialize in the 
future.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $124,000,000, for the 
FAA's research, engineering, and development activities.
    A table showing the fiscal year 2002 enacted level, the 
fiscal year 2003 budget estimate, and the Committee 
recommendation follows:

                                      RESEARCH, ENGINEERING AND DEVELOPMENT
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year     Fiscal year      Committee
                          Program Name                             2002 enacted    2003 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Improve Aviation Safety:
    Reduce Commercial Aviation Facilities:
        Fire Research and Safety................................      $5,242,000      $6,429,000      $6,429,000
        Propulsion and Fuel Systems.............................       5,998,000       3,998,000       4,998,000
        Advanced Materials/Structural Safety....................       1,338,000       1,374,000       1,374,000
        Flight Safety/Atmospheric Hazards Research..............       4,494,000       3,101,000       4,101,000
        Aging Aircraft..........................................      25,600,000      20,974,000      20,974,000
        Aircraft Catastrophic Failure Prevention Research.......       2,794,000       1,920,000       1,920,000
        Flightdeck/Maint/Sysy Integration Human Factors.........       8,003,000       8,411,000       8,411,000
    Reduce General Aviation Fatalities:
        Propulsion and Fuel Systems.............................       2,570,000       1,713,000       1,713,000
        Advanced Materials/Structural Safety....................       1,636,000       1,679,000       1,679,000
        Flight Safety/Atmospheric Hazards Research..............       1,926,000       1,329,000       1,329,000
        Aging Aircraft..........................................       6,400,000       5,243,000       5,243,000
        Flightdeck/Maint/Sysy Integration Human Factors.........       1,903,000       2,000,000       2,000,000
    Aviation System Safety:
        Aviation Safety Risk Analysis...........................       5,784,000       6,926,000       6,926,000
        ATC/AF Human Factors....................................       8,500,000      10,317,000      10,317,000
        Aeromedical Research....................................       6,121,000       6,603,000       6,603,000
        Weather Research........................................      13,877,000      19,406,000      19,406,000
    Improve Efficiency of Air Traffic Control System: Weather          9,791,000       9,099,000      12,099,000
     Research Efficiency........................................
    Reduce Environmental Impacts of Aviation: Environment and         22,081,000       7,698,000       2,698,000
     Energy.....................................................
Improve Efficiency of Mission:
    System Planning and Resource Management.....................       1,200,000       1,459,000       1,459,000
    Technical Laboratory Facilities.............................      12,250,000       6,455,000       6,455,000
    Strategic Partnership.......................................         400,000         610,000         610,000
System Security Technology:
    Explosives and Weapons Detection............................      32,624,000  ..............  ..............
    Airport Security Technology Integration.....................       2,084,000  ..............  ..............
    Aviation Security Human Factors.............................       5,163,000  ..............  ..............
    Aircraft Hardening..........................................       4,640,000  ..............  ..............
    Information System Security.................................       2,581,000  ..............  ..............
Accountwide adjustment: CSRS/FEHB accruals......................  ..............      -2,744,000      -2,744,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total Appropriation.......................................     195,000,000     124,000,000     124,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        IMPROVE AVIATION SAFETY

    Propulsion and fuel systems.--The Committee recommendation 
provides a total of $6,711,000 for propulsion and fuel systems 
research to reduce commercial and general aviation fatalities. 
Within the funds provided, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to 
continue the activities of the specialty metals processing 
consortium and $1,000,000 for additional research into the 
performance and combustion characteristics of aviation grade 
ethanol fuels.
    Flight safety/atmospheric hazards research.--The Committee 
recommendation includes a total of $5,430,000, including 
$3,000,000 for flight safety/atmospheric hazards research to 
continue the development of in-flight simulator training for 
civilian and commercial pilots at the Roswell Industrial 
Center.
    Aging aircraft.--The Committee recommendation includes a 
total of $26,217,000 for the aging aircraft program to reduce 
commercial and general aviation fatalities. The Committee has 
provided resources to continue the collaborative efforts 
between the FAA and several public and private organizations 
including the Center for Aviation Systems Reliability (CASR), 
the Airworthiness Assurance Center of Excellence (AACE) and the 
Engine Titanium Consortium (ETC). Within the appropriation, the 
recommendation includes $3,500,000 for the Center for Aviation 
Systems Reliability (CASR); $4,000,000 for Airworthiness 
Assurance Center of Excellence (AACE); $3,000,000 for Engine 
Titanium Consortium (ETC); $3,000,000 for the Aging Aircraft 
Nondestructive Inspection Validation Center (AANC); and, 
$2,500,000 for the Center for Aviation Research and Aerospace 
Technology (CARAT).
    Anomalous flight monitor.--Within the funds provided, the 
Committee includes $3,000,000 to develop a pilot project at 
Seattle-Tacoma International Airport to create a system that 
integrates and leverages the capabilities of mobile software 
objects to monitor and understand current air traffic 
operations and to sense the ``state'' of an aircraft for 
anomalous flight conditions.
    Weather research safety.--The Committee recommendation 
provides $19,406,000 to continue the FAA's weather research 
program that is focused on system safety. Within the funds 
provided for weather research, the Committee recommendation 
includes $5,000,000 to continue research to identify wake 
turbulence by utilizing pulsed laser Doppler radar technology.

          IMPROVE THE EFFICIENCY OF AIR TRAFFIC CONTROL SYSTEM

    Weather research efficiency.--The Committee includes 
$12,099,000 for weather research to improve the efficiency of 
the air traffic control system. Within the funds provided, the 
Committee includes $5,000,000 for wake turbulence research to 
expedite the development of new standards and procedures.

                REDUCE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF AVIATION

    Environment and energy research.--The Committee provides 
$2,698,000 for environment and energy research, a reduction of 
$5,000,000 due to budget constraints.

                       Grants-in-Aid for Airports


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                    (AIRPORT AND AIRWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................  $1,800,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   3,100,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,100,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect $175,000,000 of direct supplemental appropriations 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

    Chapter 471 of title 49, U.S.C. authorizes a program of 
grants to fund airport planning and development and noise 
compatibility planning and projects for public use airports in 
all States and territories.
    The Committee recommends $3,100,000,000 in liquidating cash 
for grants-in-aid for airports. This is consistent with the 
Committee's obligation limitation on airport programs for 
fiscal year 2002 and for the payment of previous years' 
obligations.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

Obligation limitation, 2002.............................  $3,300,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   3,400,000,000
Committee recommendation................................   3,400,000,000

    The total program level recommended for fiscal year 2003 
for grants-in-aid to airports is $3,400,000,000 and is intended 
to be sufficient to continue the important tasks of enhancing 
airport and airway safety, ensuring that airport standards can 
be met, maintaining existing airport capacity, and developing 
additional capacity. The amount provided includes $81,049,000 
for administration and airport technology research. Also, the 
Administration proposes that the grants-in-aid funds be used to 
make up for shortfalls in overflight fee collections to fund 
the essential air service program.
    The Committee notes that a sizable alternative source of 
funding is available to airports in the form of passenger 
facility charges [PFC's]. The first PFC charge began for 
airlines tickets issued on June 1, 1992. DOT data shows that as 
of May 1, 2002, 330 airports have been approved for collection 
of PFC's in the amount of $34,000,000,000. During calendar year 
2001 airports collected $1,590,000,000 in PFC charges, and 
$1,940,000,000 is estimated to be collected in calendar year 
2002. Of the airports collecting PFC's, approximately one-fifth 
collected about 90 percent of the total, and all of these are 
either large or medium hub airports. Prior to the authorized 
increase in PFC charges, the DOT estimated that these airports 
will collect more than $1,610,000,000 in calendar year 2001, 
depending on the number of applications received and approved 
and assuming current statutory authority. The first collections 
at the new $4.50 PFC level began on April 1, 2001 at 31 
airports. Eventually, the funding to airports from the 50 
percent nominal increase in authorized passenger facility 
charges will result in dramatically increased resources for 
airport improvements, expansions, and enhancements.

                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

    The bill includes a limitation on obligations of 
$3,400,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. This is the same as the 
President's budget request and $100,000,000 over the fiscal 
year 2002 enacted level.
    A table showing the distribution of these funds compared to 
the fiscal year 2002 levels and the President's budget request 
follows:
                                                 Fiscal year 2003 (Est.)

AIR-21 Appropriations Limitation........................  $3,400,000,000
    Airports Operations.................................     -64,620,000
    Research & Development..............................     -16,429,000
    Small Community Program.............................     -20,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Available for AIP Grants..........................   3,298,951,000
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Primary Airports........................................   1,028,358,014
Cargo (3.0 percent).....................................      98,968,530
Alaska Supplemental.....................................      21,345,114
States (20.0 percent):
    Non-Primary Entitlement.............................     341,887,082
    State Apportionment by Formula......................     317,903,118
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................     659,790,200
Carryover Entitlement...................................     300,000,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Entitlements.............................   2,108,461,858
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Small Airport Fund:
    Non Hub Airports....................................     183,303,989
    Non Commercial Service..............................      91,651,994
    Small Hub...........................................      45,825,997
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Small Airport Fund.......................     320,781,980
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Non Discretionary........................   2,429,243,838
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Noise (34 percent of Disc)..............................     295,700,436
Reliever (0.66 percent of Disc).........................       5,740,067
MAP (4 percent of Disc).................................      34,788,286
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Disc Set-asides..........................     336,228,789
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
C/S/S/N.................................................     400,108,780
Remaining Discretionary.................................     133,369,593
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Other Discretionary......................     533,478,373
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal Discretionary............................    $869,707,162
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      GRAND TOTAL.......................................   3,298,951,000

                      AIRPORT DISCRETIONARY GRANTS

    Within the overall obligation limitation in this bill, over 
$869,000,000 is available for discretionary grants to airports. 
The Committee has carefully considered a broad array of 
discretionary grant requests that can be expected in fiscal 
year 2003. Specifically, the Committee expects the FAA to give 
priority consideration to applications for the projects listed 
below in the categories of the AIP for which they are eligible. 
If funds in the remaining discretionary category are used for 
any projects in fiscal year 2003 that are not listed below, the 
Committee expects that they will be for projects for which FAA 
has issued letters of intent (including letters of intent the 
Committee recommends below that the FAA subsequently issues), 
or for projects that will produce significant aviation safety 
improvements or significant improvements in systemwide capacity 
or otherwise have a very high benefit/cost ratio.
    Within the program levels recommended, the Committee 
directs that priority be given to applications involving the 
further development of the following airports:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                     Airport                                                  Project
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Abilene Airport, TX.............................  Various Improvements
Akutan Airport, AK..............................  Various Improvements
Allen Army Airbase, AK..........................  Various Improvements & Maintenance
Anchorage Int'l Airport, AK.....................  Various Improvements
Andalusia Opp, AL...............................  Runway/Taxiway Overlay
Andrews-Murphy Airport, NC......................  Various Improvements
Ankeny Regional Airport, IA.....................  Hangar, Taxiway, Apron
Artesia Municipal Airport, NM...................  Various Improvements
Atka Airport, AK................................  Various Improvements
Atmore Municipal Airport, AL....................  Improvements in Safety Zones
Austin Straubel Field, WI.......................  Various Improvements
Autauga County Airport, AL......................  Overlay, Widen Existing Runway
Baltimore-Washington Int'l Airport, MD..........  Various Improvements
Barbour County Regional, WV.....................  Various Improvements
Barkley Regional Airport, KY....................  Runway Extension, Various Improvements
Barter Island Dew Airport (Kaktovik), AK........  Various Improvements
Bartlesville Municipal Airport, OK..............  Runway, Safety Area
Batesville Regional Airport, AR.................  Various Improvements
Baxter County Regional Airport, AR..............  Runway
Benedum Airport, WV.............................  Various Improvements
Bert Mooney Airport, MT.........................  Various Improvements
Billings Airport, MT............................  Terminal & Security
Birmingham International Airport, AL............  Various Improvements
Bismark Municipal Airport, ND...................  Terminal Replacement
Blackwell Field Airport, AL.....................  Land Acquisition for Runway Extension
Bob Wiley Field Airport, SD.....................  Various Improvements
Bowling Green/Warren Regional, KY...............  Facility
Bowman Field Airport, KY........................  Various Improvements
Braxton County Airport, WV......................  Various Improvements
Bremerton Airport, WA...........................  Various Improvements
Bruce Campbell Field Airport, MS................  Land Acq., Taxiway
Buffalo Int'l Airport, NY.......................  Runway,Taxiway Ext./Rehab.
Burlington-Alamance Airport, NC.................  Various Improvements
Bush Field Airport, GA..........................  New Terminal, Access & Parking
Carl P. Savage Airport, GA......................  Runway Extension & Widening
Cartersville/Bartow Airport, GA.................  Various Improvements
Central Illinois Regional.Bloomington-Normal, IL  Airport Improvement Projects
Central Nebraska Regional Airport, NE...........  Taxiway & Runway
Central Wisconsin Airport, WI...................  Runway, Taxiway
Centre Municipal Airport, AL....................  Land Acquisition & Runway Ext.
Chan Gurney Airport, SD.........................  Runway Lighting System
Charlottsville-Albermarle Airport, VA...........  Various Improvements
Cherokee County Airport, GA.....................  Runway Ext., Taxiway & Hangar
Cherry Capital Airport, MI......................  Terminal Construction
Cheyene Airport, WY.............................  Runway Safety Area & Taxiway
Cheyenne Airport, CO............................  Runway Safety & Taxiway
Cheyenne Eagle Butte, SD........................  Reservation Hangar
Chippewa County Int'l Airport, MI...............  Passenger Terminal
Cincinnati Northern Kentucky Regional, KY.......  Feasibility Study
Clarion County Airport, PA......................  Runway Expansion
Clark County Airport, IN........................  Lengthen Runway
Cleveland-Hopkins Int'l Airport, OH.............  Noise Mitigation
Clinton Airport, IA.............................  Runway, Taxiway Paving
Concord Regional Airport,NC.....................  Runway Ext., Land Acquisition
Connellsville Airport, PA.......................  Runway Extension
Council Bluffs Airport, IA......................  Land Acquisition, Runway
Craig Field Airport, AL.........................  Runway Improvements
Cumberland Regional Airport, MD.................  Various Improvements
Dane County Regional Airport, WI................  Runway Construction
Davenport Municipal Airport, IA.................  New Terminal Building
Davis City Airport, WV..........................  Various Improvements
Denton Municipal Airport, TX....................  Improvements
Denver International Airport, CO................  Runway
Detroit Metro Wayne County Airport, MI..........  Terminal, Runway Rehabilitation
Dona Ana County Airport, NM.....................  Runway and Taxiway
Drake Field, AR.................................  Various Improvements
Eagle County Airport, CO........................  Radar Improvements
Eastern Iowa Regional Airport, IA...............  Taxiway, Aprons
Eastern West Virginia, WV.......................  Various Improvements
Easterwood Airport, TX..........................  Various Improvements
Elkins-Randolph Field, WV.......................  Various Improvements
Emmett County Regional Airport, MI..............  Passenger Terminal
Erie International, PA..........................  Runway Extension
Essex County Airport, NJ........................  Various Improvements
Fairfield County Airport, SC....................  Runway Extension
Fairfield Municipal Airport, IA.................  Runway & Taxiway
Fairhope Municipal Airport, AL..................  New Runway
Fairmont Municipal Airport, WV..................  Various Improvements
False Pass Airport, AK..........................  Various Improvements
Fayette Airport, WV.............................  Various Improvements
Ford Airport, MI................................  Runway Reconstruction
Freeport Albertus Airport, IL...................  Airport Improvement Projects
Fort Lauderdale Airport, FL.....................  Automated People Mover Study
General Mitchell International Airport , WI.....  Taxiway Extension
Georgetown Air Services Airport, DE.............  Security Improvements
Glacier Park Int'l Airport, MT..................  Infrastructure Projects
Glynco Jetport, GA..............................  Terminal, Renovation
Golden Triangle Regional Airport, MS............  Various Improvement
Grand Forks Int'l Airport, ND...................  Runway & Parallel Taxiway
Grant County Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
Great Falls International Airport, MT...........  Category III Upgrades
Greater Rochester Int'l Airport, NY.............  Various Improvements
Greater Rockford Airport, IL....................  Airport Improvement Projects
Greenbriar Valley Airport, WV...................  Various Improvements
Gulfport-Biloxi Airport, MS.....................  Terminal Expansion & Security
Harrell Field Airport, AR.......................  Various Improvements
Harrisburg International Airport, PA............  Multimodal Terminal
Headland Municipal Airport, AL..................  Land Acquisition, Runway, & Taxiway
Helena Regional Airport, MT.....................  Facility Modernization
Henry E. Rohlsen Airport, St. Croix.............  Runway Extension
Herrell Field Airport, AR.......................  Repair Facility Camden
Highmore Municipal Airport, SD..................  Runway
Holly Springs-Marshall County Airport, MS.......  Runway Extension
Houston Municipal Airport, MS...................  Improvements
Houston Municipal Airport, TX...................  AIP Priority Language
Indiana City-Jimmy Stewart Airport, PA..........  Runway Extension
Jackson County Airport, WV......................  Various Improvements
Jackson Int'l Airport, MS.......................  Terminal Renovations
Jackson Municipal Airport, AL...................  Improvement Project
Johnstown-Cambria County Airport, PA............  Distribution Center
Jonesboro Municipal Airport, AR.................  Runway Expansion & terminal
Joplin Regional Airport, MO.....................  Terminal Improvements
Juneau Harbor Int'l Airport, AK.................  Various Improvements
Kansas City Downtown Airport, MO................  Runway & Terminal Improvements
Kee Field Airport, WV...........................  Various Improvements
Kennett Memorial Airport, MO....................  Runway Improvements
Ketchikan Int'l Airport, AK.....................  Various Improvements
Key Field Airport, MS...........................  New Terminal Building
Kodiak Airport, AK..............................  Various Improvements
LaCrosse Municipal Airport, WI..................  Parallel Taxiway
Lafayette Airport, LA...........................  Runway, Taxiway
Lambert Airport, MO.............................  Parks & Runway Project
Lawrence County Airport, PA.....................  Various Improvements
Lehigh Valley International Airport, PA.........  Lighting
Lewis County Airport, MO........................  Hangar Projects
Lewis University Airport, IL....................  Runway & Hangar
Livingston County Airport, MI...................  Runway Construction
Logan County Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
Louisville Int'l Airport, KY....................  Integrated Advanced Technology, Noise
Madison Airport, MS.............................  Land Acquisition, Taxiway
Madison County Airport, AL......................  Various Improvements
Manistee County Blacker Airport, MI.............  Terminal Building
Marion-Crittenden County Airport, KY............  Expansion
Marks Airport, MS...............................  Runway Extension
Marlinton City Airport, WV......................  Various Improvements
Marshall City Airport,WV........................  Various Improvements
Mason City Airport, IA..........................  Runway
Mason County Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
McAlester Airport, OK...........................  Runway & Various Improvements
McComb-Pike County Airport, MS..................  Various Improvements
McKinney Municipal Airport, TX..................  Taxiway
Memorial Field Airport, AR......................  Terminal Hangars
Mercer City Airport, WV.........................  Various Improvements
Meridian Key Field Airport, MS..................  Construction
Miami International Airport, FL.................  Apron Construction Project
Mingo County Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
Minneapolis-St. Paul Int'l Airport, MN..........  De-icing/holding pad
Missoula Int'l Airport, MT......................  Master Plan, Runway, Land
Monroe Municipal Airport, NC....................  Security Improvements
Monroe Regional Airport, LA.....................  Terminal
Montgomery Regional (Dannelly Field) Airport, AL  Terminal Improvements
Morganton-Lenoir Airport, NC....................  Terminal & Parking
Morgantown Muni-walter, WV......................  Various Improvements
Nashville Int'l Airport, TN.....................  Security Enhancement
New Castle County Airport, DE...................  Digital Video Recording System
New Orleans Airport, LA.........................  Various Improvements
Newport News-Williamsburg Int'l, VA.............  Baggage Claim Facility
Newton Airport, IA..............................  Taxiway
Niagara Falls Int'l Airport, NY.................  Hangar Demolition
Northwest Arkansas Regional, AR.................  Airport Expansion
Oakland Pontiac County Airport, MI..............  Noise Mitigation Program
Ogden Hinckley Airport, UT......................  Runway Extension
Orlando Int'l Airport, FL.......................  Wildlife Attractants Project
Orlando Sanford International Airport, FL.......  Runway
Ottumwa Industrial Airport, IA..................  Taxiway
Palmer Municipal Airport, AK....................  Various Improvements
Petersburg Airport, AK..........................  Runway Apron & Various Improvements
Philadelphia International Airport, PA..........  Capital Improvements
Philadelphia Municipal Airport, MS..............  Airfield Expansion
Pierre Regional Airport, SD.....................  Runway & Lighting System
Pilot Point, AK.................................  Airport Expansion
Pittsburgh International Airport, PA............  Runway & Security
Port Columbus Int'l Airport, OH.................  Airport Improvements
Port Heiden Airport, AK.........................  Airport Expansion
Princeton/Caldwell County Airport, KY...........  Runway Extension
Pryor Field Regional, AL........................  Various Improvements
Quad City Airport/Moline, IL....................  Airport Improvement Projects
Raleigh City Memorial, WV.......................  Various Improvements
Ralph Wein Memorial Airport (Kotzebue) AK.......  Various Improvements
Ralph Wien Memorial, AK.........................  Passenger Terminal, Road Relocation
Reagan National Airport, VA.....................  Various Improvements
Reno Stead Airport, NV..........................  Runway and Taxiway
Reno/Tahoe Int'l Airport, NV....................  Taxiway, Runway
Richard B. Russel Airport, GA...................  Runway Extension & Security
Ripley County Airport, MS.......................  Runway Extension
Roberts Field Airport, OR.......................  Terminal, Expansion
Rock County Airport,WI..........................  Runway
Rockingham-Hamlet County Airport, NC............  Expansion
Romeo State Airport, MI.........................  Runway Improvements
Roswell Airport, NM.............................  Maintenance Facility Expansion
Russellville Municipal Airport, AL..............  Runway Extension
Rutland State Airport, VT.......................  Public Taxiway
Ryan Field Baton Rouge Airport, LA..............  Various Improvements, Language
Saline County, AR...............................  Relocation
Shreveport Regional Airport, LA.................  Runway, Noise, Cargo
Southcenteral, AK...............................  Float Plane Facility
Spencer City Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
Spokane Int'l Airport, WA.......................  Taxiway
Springfield Capital Airport, IL.................  Airport Improvement Projects
Springfield/Branson Mid-field, MO...............  Terminal Project
St. George, UT..................................  Replacement Airport Land Acquisition
St. Louis Lambert, MO...........................  Expansion & Noise Mitigation
St. Paul & St. George, Pribilof Island, AK......  Runway Improvements
Stanly County Airport, NC.......................  Various Improvements
Statesville Airport, NC.........................  Various Improvements
Stennis Int'l Airport, MS.......................  Expansion
Stockton Metro Airport,CA.......................  Upgrades
Summersville Airport, WV........................  Various Improvements
The Eastern Iowa Airport, IA....................  Taxiway, Apron
Toledo Express Airport, OH......................  Remediation & Land Development
Tom B David Field Airport, GA...................  Security & Infrastructure
Tri-State/Walker-Long Field, WV.................  Various Improvements
Tulsa International Airport, OK.................  Security Improvements
Tunica County Airport, MS.......................  Construct Main Aircraft Parking Apron
Unalaska Airport, AK............................  Various Improvements
Upshur County Regional Airport, WV..............  Various Improvements
Vermillion Airport, IL..........................  Various Improvements
Walnut Ridge Regional Airport, AR...............  Runway Extension
Washington Memorial Airport, MO.................  Runway Project
Waynesboro Municipal Airport, MS................  Extension and Runway Widening
Weedon Field Airport, AL........................  Construct Parallel Taxiway
Welch Municipal Airport, WV.....................  Various Improvements
Wendell H. Ford Airport, KY.....................  Various Improvements
Wheeling-Ohio Airport, WV.......................  Various Improvements
Wilmington International, NC....................  Various Improvements
Winfield City Airport, WV.......................  Various Improvements
Winona-Montgomery County Airport, MS............  Various Improvements
Wood City/Gill Robb Wilson Field, WV............  Various Improvements
Yeager Airport, WV..............................  Various Improvements
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                           LETTERS OF INTENT

    Congress authorized FAA to use letters of intent [LOI's] to 
fund multiyear airport improvement projects that will 
significantly enhance systemwide airport capacity. FAA is also 
to consider a project's benefits and costs in determining 
whether to approve it for AIP funding. FAA adopted a policy of 
committing to LOI's no more than about 50 percent of forecasted 
discretionary funds allocated for capacity, safety, security, 
and noise projects. The Committee viewed this policy as 
reasonable because it gave FAA the flexibility to fund other 
worthy projects that do not fall under a LOI. Both FAA and 
airport authorities have found letters of intent helpful in 
planning and funding airport development.

                             ADMINISTRATION

    The bill provides that, within the overall obligation 
limitation, $81,049,000 is available for administration of the 
airports program by the FAA and airport technology research.
    The Committee recommendation includes $16,429,000 for 
Airport Technology Research. The program is included in AIP for 
fiscal year 2003 as the research directly supports improvements 
in airport safety, capacity, and efficiency. The research is 
directed at mitigation of wildlife strike hazards to aircraft, 
improvement of airport rescue and firefighting, improvement of 
airport lighting and marking, reduction in runway incursions, 
and improvement in airport pavement and design. It also 
includes funding for the 18 FTE in the Airport Technology 
Branch at the William J. Hughes Technical Center and continued 
operation of the pavement test facility at the Technical 
Center.

                           GENERAL PROVISIONS

    Second career training program.--The Committee has included 
bill language which was included in the President's budget 
request which prohibits the use of appropriated funds for the 
second career training program. This prohibition has been 
carried in annual appropriations acts for many years.
    Sunday premium pay.--The bill retains a provision, first 
included in the fiscal year 1995 appropriations bill, which 
prohibits FAA from paying Sunday premium pay, except in those 
cases where the individual actually worked on a Sunday. This 
provision is identical to that which was in effect for fiscal 
years 1995-2002. It was requested by the administration for 
fiscal year 2003.
    Manned auxiliary flight service stations.--The Committee 
has retained bill language which was requested by the 
administration to prohibit the use of funds for operating a 
manned auxiliary flight service station in the contiguous 
United States. There is no funding provided in the 
``Operations'' account for such stations in fiscal year 2003.
    Facilitating Environmental Reviews to Increase Airport 
Capacity.--The bill authorizes the Federal Aviation 
Administration (sec. 338) to use funds from airport sponsors, 
including the airport's ``Grants-in-Aid for Airports'' 
entitlement funds, for the hiring of additional staff or for 
obtaining services of consultants for the purpose of 
facilitating environmental activities related to airport 
projects that add critical airport capacity to the national air 
transportation system.
    FAA and TSA Facilities on Airport Property.--The bill 
includes a provision (sec. 335) that prohibits funds in this 
Act to be used to adopt guidelines or regulations requiring 
airport sponsors to provide the Federal Aviation Administration 
or the Transportation Security Administration ``without cost'' 
buildings, maintenance, or space for FAA services. The 
prohibition does not apply to negotiations between FAA and 
airport sponsors concerning ``below market'' rates for such 
services or to grant assurances that require airport sponsors 
to provide land without cost to the FAA for air traffic control 
facilities. The prohibition also does not apply to the TSA's 
use of space for security checkpoints.

                     FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    The principal mission of the Federal Highway Administration 
is to, in partnership with State and local governments, foster 
the development of a safe, efficient, and effective highway and 
intermodal system nationwide including access to and within 
National Forests, National Parks, Indian Lands and other public 
lands.
    Under the Committee recommendations, a total program level 
of $32,892,767,000 would be provided for the activities of the 
Federal Highway Administration in fiscal year 2003. The 
following table summarizes the fiscal year 2002 program levels, 
the fiscal year 2003 program request and the Committee's 
recommendations:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                           Fiscal year--
                                                                 --------------------------------    Committee
                             Program                               2002 program     2003 budget   recommendation
                                                                       level         estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal-aid highways limitation \1\.............................     31,799,104      23,204,787      31,800,000
    Limitation on administrative expenses \1\...................       (311,000)       (317,732)       (317,732)
Exempt Federal-aid obligations..................................        965,308         892,767         892,767
Appalachian Development Highway System..........................        200,000   ..............        200,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................     32,964,412      24,097,554      32,892,767
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public Law 107-87 as amended by sec. 1106,
  Public Law 107-117.

                 Limitation on Administrative Expenses

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................    $311,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................     317,732,000
Committee recommendation \2\............................     317,732,000

\1\ Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public 
Law 107-87 as amended by sec. 1106, Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Funding for motor carrier administration expenses is included as a 
separate limitation in the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

    The limitation on administrative expenses controls spending 
for virtually all the salaries and expenses of the Federal 
Highway Administration. The Transportation Equity Act for the 
21st Century changed the funding source for the highway 
research accounts from the administrative takedown of the 
Federal-Aid Highway Program to individual contract authority 
provisions. The Committee recommends a limitation of 
$317,732,000. Within the funds provided, the Committee includes 
$1,261,000 for the Office of Intermodalism.
    The following table reflects the fiscal year 2002 level, 
the 2003 level requested by the administration, and the 
Committee's recommendation:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                         Fiscal year--
                                                              ----------------------------------    Committee
                           Program                                                2003 budget     recommendation
                                                                  2002 level        estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses:
    Salaries and benefits....................................          222,936          231,857          231,857
    Travel...................................................            9,473            9,473            9,473
    Transportation...........................................              465              465              465
    GSA rent.................................................           20,621           24,646           24,646
    Communications, rent, and utilities......................            9,607            9,607            9,607
    Printing.................................................            1,412            1,412            1,412
    TASC.....................................................            7,025            6,184            6,184
    Supplies.................................................            2,000            2,000            2,000
    Equipment................................................            4,536            4,536            4,536
    Other (including Office of Intermodalism)................           32,925           27,552           27,552
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................      \1\ 311,000          317,732          317,732
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect TASC reduction of $841,000 in section 349 of Public Law 107-87 as amended by section 1106,
  Public Law 107-117.

    The Committee recommends the following items be funded 
under section 104(a)(1)(A): $106,967,000 for the border 
enforcement program within the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration. Within that amount, $47,000,000 shall be 
available for the construction of border inspection facilities 
along the U.S./Mexico border. The administration's budget 
proposed that this $47,000,000 expenditure be funded as a 
statutory earmark within the National Corridor Planning and 
Development Program.
    Child passenger protection education grants.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $7,500,000 to continue providing 
grants, as authorized under section 2003(b) of TEA21, that 
train safety professionals on all aspects of proper child 
restraint use and educate the public on the installation, 
selection, and placement of child safety seats.

                          Federal-Aid Highways


                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Limitation, 2002 \1\

                                                         $31,799,104,000

Budget estimate, 2003

                                                          23,204,787,000

Committee recommendation

                                                          31,800,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect 0.22 percent reduction in section 1403 of Public 
Law 106-554.

    The accompanying bill includes language limiting fiscal 
year 2003 Federal-aid highways obligations to $31,800,000,000 
an increase of $896,000 over the fiscal year 2002 enacted level 
and $8,595,213,000 over the budget request.
    The following table shows the distribution of highway funds 
apportioned to the States under four scenarios: the fiscal year 
2002 enacted level, the President's budget, the level 
authorized in TEA21 without any negative adjustment associated 
with the Revenue Aligned Budget Authority Program, and the 
Committee recommendation.

         FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION ESTIMATED FISCAL YEAR 2003 DISTRIBUTION OF OBLIGATION LIMITATION
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Actual fiscal   Fiscal year 2003  Fiscal year 2003   Fiscal year 2003
                States                      year 2002        President's     TEA21 (No RABA)       Committee
                                        distribution \1\     budget \1\            \1\        recommendation \1\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama...............................      $561,362,701      $415,438,659      $497,809,309       $572,658,214
Alaska................................       314,793,656       243,992,539       282,049,558        317,551,112
Arizona...............................       486,222,525       360,625,443       428,178,058        491,481,051
Arkansas..............................       362,646,673       271,870,783       325,162,357        371,757,917
California............................     2,516,921,592     1,873,897,524     2,251,986,391      2,605,145,070
Colorado..............................       353,162,510       262,226,522       315,313,485        364,328,955
Connecticut...........................       408,915,843       309,661,533       366,787,459        420,695,641
Delaware..............................       119,922,108        89,903,183       107,786,314        124,522,828
District of Columbia..................       110,272,767        80,228,034        97,670,902        114,203,615
Florida...............................     1,288,949,611       962,397,636     1,138,108,292      1,303,298,956
Georgia...............................       988,683,758       736,644,102       874,372,963      1,004,343,983
Hawaii................................       142,269,483       105,377,242       126,117,171        145,782,286
Idaho.................................       211,274,214       158,107,857       188,164,413        215,883,889
Illinois..............................       933,052,868       687,635,445       828,349,186        962,103,966
Indiana...............................       637,416,428       480,626,303       571,752,610        657,942,217
Iowa..................................       329,539,179       244,147,409       295,194,209        343,615,244
Kansas................................       324,853,609       237,945,876       288,082,372        335,681,036
Kentucky..............................       483,773,648       357,260,223       428,654,998        496,043,266
Louisiana.............................       433,572,935       326,043,519       391,892,073        454,479,647
Maine.................................       147,086,603       108,424,690       130,260,610        148,907,537
Maryland..............................       444,585,693       334,786,649       402,215,120        465,946,381
Massachusetts.........................       514,199,794       382,618,573       460,170,290        528,895,677
Michigan..............................       894,928,134       664,400,228       792,891,230        914,522,416
Minnesota.............................       408,442,237       304,948,964       367,024,766        426,121,388
Mississippi...........................       355,303,061       264,919,392       317,912,106        368,074,860
Missouri..............................       646,921,711       481,643,989       579,580,765        670,611,287
Montana...............................       266,186,472       202,334,294       239,147,070        273,465,583
Nebraska..............................       215,987,903       157,601,762       190,753,358        221,920,788
Nevada................................       197,993,516       147,568,451       175,748,970        202,310,700
New Hampshire.........................       140,214,707       105,843,997       126,691,084        145,549,494
New Jersey............................       724,629,766       534,247,633       643,336,952        747,051,638
New Mexico............................       268,590,255       201,195,690       240,387,850        277,424,892
New York..............................     1,401,040,155     1,050,848,025     1,260,822,015      1,460,333,241
North Carolina........................       773,663,974       576,896,840       686,915,153        790,739,256
North Dakota..........................       179,364,219       133,140,857       159,945,661        185,093,263
Ohio..................................       961,276,478       715,885,800       858,861,756        994,232,940
Oklahoma..............................       428,332,860       313,870,027       379,144,803        439,882,856
Oregon................................       337,795,085       252,007,794       303,669,209        346,942,106
Pennsylvania..........................     1,391,590,528     1,031,424,560     1,241,077,672      1,421,075,966
Rhode Island..........................       164,111,783       121,859,206       145,918,370        167,518,858
South Carolina........................       461,159,042       345,741,214       411,340,455        469,016,474
South Dakota..........................       199,167,503       148,832,688       178,370,728        201,619,207
Tennessee.............................       622,352,003       470,475,704       564,021,658        652,460,489
Texas.................................     2,146,241,884     1,593,917,206     1,895,420,532      2,176,247,712
Utah..................................       216,502,048       159,143,771       192,107,692        223,449,500
Vermont...............................       124,154,439        92,915,343       111,740,964        129,451,017
Virginia..............................       709,623,612       537,180,528       640,818,719        737,593,183
Washington............................       493,764,590       363,330,177       438,456,193        509,989,784
West Virginia.........................       308,053,178       231,628,118       278,412,016        322,971,290
Wisconsin.............................       545,543,085       405,758,783       482,676,315        555,299,224
Wyoming...............................       188,996,676       141,882,461       170,844,171        197,057,048
                                       -------------------------------------------------------------------------
      SUBTOTAL........................    27,885,409,102    20,781,303,246    24,870,116,373     28,673,294,948
                                       =========================================================================
Allocation Programs \2\...............     3,913,694,898     2,423,483,754     2,783,883,627      3,126,705,052
                                       =========================================================================
      TOTAL...........................    31,799,104,000    23,204,787,000    27,654,000,000     31,800,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes special limitation for minimum guarantee, Appalachia, and high priority projects and excludes
  exempt minimum guarantee and emergency relief.
\2\ Includes territories.

                     FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS PROGRAMS

    The roads and bridges that make up our nation's highway 
infrastructure are built, operated, and maintained through the 
joint efforts of Federal, State, and local governments. States 
have much flexibility to use Federal-aid highway funds to best 
meet their individual needs and priorities, with FHWA's 
assistance and oversight.
    The Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21), 
the highway, highway safety, and transit authorization through 
fiscal year 2003 makes funds available in the following major 
categories:
    National highway system.--The Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991 authorized the 
National Highway System (NHS), which was subsequently 
established as a 163,000-mile road system by the National 
Highway System Designation Act of 1995. This system serves 
major population centers, intermodal transportation facilities, 
international border crossings, and major destinations. It is 
comprised of all interstate routes, selected urban and 
principal rural arterials, defense highways, and major highway 
connectors carrying up to 76 percent of commercial truck 
traffic and 44 percent of all vehicle traffic. A State may 
transfer up to half of its NHS funds to the Surface 
Transportation program (STP) and all NHS funds with the 
concurrence of the Secretary of Transportation. The Federal 
share of the NHS is an 80 percent match and funds remain 
available for 4 fiscal years.
    Interstate maintenance.--The 46,567-mile Dwight D. 
Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways 
retains a separate identity within the NHS. This program 
finances projects to rehabilitate, restore, resurface and 
reconstruct the Interstate system. Reconstruction of bridges, 
interchanges, and over-crossings along existing interstate 
routes is also an eligible activity if it does not add capacity 
other than high occupancy vehicle (HOV) and auxiliary lanes.
    All remaining Federal funding to complete the initial 
construction of the interstate system has been provided through 
previous highway legislation. The TEA21 provides flexibility to 
States in fully utilizing remaining unobligated balances of 
prior Interstate Construction authorizations. States with no 
remaining work to complete the Interstate System may transfer 
any surplus Interstate Construction funds to their Interstate 
Maintenance program. States with remaining completion work on 
Interstate gaps or open-to-traffic segments may relinquish 
Interstate Construction fund eligibility for the work and 
transfer the Federal share of the cost to their Interstate 
Maintenance program.
    Funds provided for the Interstate maintenance discretionary 
program in fiscal year 2003 shall be available for the 
following activities in the corresponding amounts:

        Project                                                   Amount

I-15 Reconstruction, 10800 South to 600 North, UT.......      $6,000,000
I-182/SR-240 Interchange Reconstruction, WA.............       3,000,000
I-195 Relocation Project, RI............................       3,000,000
I-25 Broadway & Alameda Interchange Rebuilding, CO......       5,000,000
I-29 Madison Street Interchange, Sioux Falls, SD........       4,000,000
I-295 Via Duct to I-76, NJ..............................       2,000,000
I-30/I-35 Dallas, Construction of Bridges for Trinity 
    River, TX...........................................       6,000,000
I-90, Exit 32 Interchange at Sturgis, SD................       4,000,000
I-35/Turkey Creek, Reconstruction Project, KS...........       3,000,000
I-40 Crosstown Realignment, OK..........................       6,000,000
I-40 Paseo del Volcan Interchange, Albuquerque, NM......       2,000,000
I-44 & US 65 Interchange, MO............................       2,000,000
I-55 Church Rd. to TN State Line, DeSoto County, MS.....      10,000,000
I-55/US-49 Flyover Near Jackson, MS.....................       6,000,000
I-65/70 Market Square Redesign/Replace ramp, IN.........       5,000,000
I-75 Improvements South West Florida, FL................       2,000,000
I-75/I-475 Systems Interchange Upgrade at North Cove, OH       1,100,000
I-90 Joint Port of Entry Project, WY....................       2,500,000
Marquette Interchange Reconstruction, WI................       8,000,000
Port of Garfield Road & Bridge Road, WA.................         500,000
Route 80 Paterson Interchange,NJ........................         400,000
Sunnyside, South First St. Reconstruction, WA...........       1,500,000
SW First-NW Lake Road Project, WA.......................       3,000,000
Union Gap, Valley Mall Blvd., WA........................       1,500,000
US-12, Burbank to Walla Walla, WA.......................       2,500,000
US-63/I-70 Interchange Improvements, MO.................      10,000,000

    Surface transportation program.--The surface transportation 
program (STP) is a very flexible program that may be used by 
the states and localities for any roads (including NHS) that 
are not functionally classified as local or rural minor 
collectors. These roads are collectively referred to as 
Federal-aid highways. Bridge projects paid with STP funds are 
not restricted to Federal-aid highways but may be on any public 
road. Transit capital projects are also eligible under this 
program. The total funding for the STP may be augmented by the 
transfer of funds from other programs and by minimum guarantee 
funds under TEA21 which may be used as if they were STP funds. 
Once distributed to the states, STP funds must be used 
according to the following percentages: 10 percent for safety 
construction; 10 percent for transportation enhancement; 50 
percent divided among areas of over 200,000 population and 
remaining areas of the State; and, 30 percent for any area of 
the state. Areas of 5,000 population or less are guaranteed an 
amount based on previous funding, and 15 percent of the amounts 
reserved for these areas may be spent on rural minor 
collectors. The Federal share for the STP program is 80 percent 
with a 4-year availability period.
    Bridge replacement and rehabilitation program.--This 
program is continued by the TEA21 to provide assistance for 
bridges on public roads, including a discretionary set-aside 
for high cost bridges and for the seismic retrofit of bridges. 
Fifty percent of a state's bridge funds may be transferred to 
the NHS or the STP, but the amount of any such transfer is 
deducted from the national bridge needs used in the program's 
apportionment formula for the following year.
    At least 15 percent, but not more than 35 percent, of a 
State's apportioned bridge funds must be spent on bridges not 
on the Federal-aid system.
    Funds provided for the bridge discretionary program in 
fiscal year 2003 shall be available for the following 
activities in the corresponding amounts:

        Project                                                   Amount

Bull Slough Bridge Repair, AL...........................      $1,000,000
Canvas Bridge, Nicholas County, WV......................       6,000,000
Covered Bridges, including $2,000,000 for Vermont.......      10,000,000
Depot Street Bridge restoration, Beacon Falls, CT.......       1,000,000
Golden Gate Bridge Seismic Retrofit, CA.................       6,000,000
Granite Street Bridge, Manchester, NH...................       8,000,000
Historic Woodrow Wilson Bridge, Flowood, MS.............       1,000,000
Hot Metal Bridge, PA....................................         500,000
I-195 Washington Bridge Replacement, RI.................       8,000,000
Indian River Inlet Bridge Repairs in Sussex, DE.........       5,000,000
Lexington Bridge, Cowlitz-Wahkiakum WA..................       7,500,000
Market Street Bridge Replacement, Lycoming County, PA...       4,500,000
Missouri River Two State Bridge Project, NE.............       4,000,000
Monroe St. Bridge Rehabilitation, Spokane WA............       2,500,000
Pearl Harbor Memorial Bridge Reconstruction, New Haven, 
    CT..................................................       6,000,000
Pomeroy-Mason Bridge, Mason County, WV..................       6,000,000
Rehabilitation of the Waldo-Hancock Bridge, ME..........       5,000,000
Russell St. Viaduct Replacement (MD295) Baltimore, MD...       8,000,000
Sauvie Island Bridge, Replacement Project, OR...........       3,000,000
Snake River Crossing EIS, Twin Falls, ID................       1,000,000
Tate's Bluff, Arkansas Replacement Bridge, AR...........       1,500,000
Wacker Drive Reconstruction, Chicago, IL................       4,500,000

    National Historic Covered Bridge Preservation Program.--The 
Committee recommendation provides $10,000,000 for the covered 
bridge program within the funds made available for the 
discretionary bridge program. Within this amount, $2,000,000 
shall be made available for covered bridges in the State of 
Vermont.
    Congestion mitigation and air quality improvement 
program.--This program provides funds to States to improve air 
quality in non-attainment and maintenance areas. A wide range 
of transportation activities are eligible, as long as DOT, 
after consultation with EPA, determines they are likely to help 
meet national ambient air quality standards. TEA21 provides 
greater flexibility to engage public-private partnerships, and 
expands and clarifies eligibilities to include programs to 
reduce extreme cold starts, maintenance areas, and particulate 
matter (PM-10) nonattainment and maintenance areas. If a State 
has no non-attainment or maintenance areas, the funds may be 
used as if they were STP funds.
    On-road and off-road demonstration projects may be 
appropriate candidates for funding under the CMAQ program. Both 
sectors are critical for satisfying the purposes of the CMAQ 
program, including regional emissions and verifying new mobile 
source control techniques.
    Federal lands highways.--This program provides 
authorizations through three major categories--Indian 
reservation roads, parkways and park roads, and public lands 
highways (which incorporates the previous forest highways 
category)--as well as a new category for Federally-owned public 
roads providing access to or within the National Wildlife 
Refuge System. TEA21 also establishes a new program for 
improving deficient bridges on Indian reservation roads.
    The Committee directs that the funds allocated for this 
program in this bill and in permanent law are to be derived 
from the FHWA's public lands discretionary program, and not 
from funds allocated to the National Park Service's regions. 
Funds provided for the Federal lands program in fiscal year 
2003 shall be available for the following activities:

        Project                                                   Amount

Arches National Park Main Entrance Relocation, UT.......      $1,250,000
BIA Route 13/Route1 Project, Makah, WA..................       5,400,000
Blackstone River Valley Bikeway, RI.....................       2,000,000
Cattle Point Road, San Juan County, WA..................         350,000
Colonial Historic Park--Jamestown 400th Anniversary 
    Transportation Improvements, VA.....................       2,170,000
Council Grove Lake Embankment Roadway, KS...............       1,500,000
Downeast Heritage Center, Parking & Access, ME..........         400,000
Fort Drum Road Improvements, NY.........................         770,000
Fox Ridge Road Repair, SD...............................       1,300,000
Freemont County Project, WY.............................       1,100,000
Frog Level Road, Neshoba County, MS.....................       1,000,000
Gateway Trail, Grand Canyon National Park, AZ...........       1,380,000
Glacier National Park, Going-to-the-Sun Road, MT........       5,000,000
Hawaii Statewide Improvements...........................       5,000,000
Highway 93 Expansion Project, MT........................       1,400,000
Homochitto National Forest Access Rd, Lincoln, MS.......       2,000,000
Hoonah Road (FM), AK....................................       1,400,000
Hoover Dam Bypass New Bridge downstream of Dam, NV......       8,500,000
Hoover Dam Bridge Bypass, AZ............................       2,000,000
Hwy 2 Highline EIS Project, MT..........................       1,000,000
I-215 Widening, NV......................................       3,500,000
Iditarod Historic National Trail Project, AK............         500,000
Kenai River Trail, AK...................................         500,000
Lewis and Clark, Gates of the Mountains Road Project, MT         600,000
Marsh-Billings-Rockefeller Park Pedestrian Walkway, VT..         380,000
Menominee Indian Tribe road improvements, WI............       2,000,000
Metlakatla/Walden Point Road, AK........................       2,000,000
Naknek Lake Camp Road, AK...............................       3,400,000
Patuxent River Naval Air Museum & Visitor Center, MD....       1,000,000
Preston North/South Richardson County, NE...............       1,000,000
Shotgun Cove Road, AK...................................       2,000,000
Southeast Alaska Seatrails, AK..........................         750,000
Spirit Lake Tribe Shared Use Path, Fort Totten, ND......         520,000
SR-149 Resurfacing, Rio Grande National Forest, CO......       2,000,000
SR-164 Muckleshoots, WA.................................         420,000
SR-323 Paving Project, Ekalaka & Alzada, Fallon County, 
    MT..................................................       1,000,000
US 95 Widening Laughlin Cut-off to Railroad Pass, NV....      10,000,000
USMC Heritage Center Access, VA.........................       2,000,000
Yakama Signal Peak Road, WA.............................       4,150,000

    Minimum guarantee.--Under TEA21, after the computation of 
funds for major Federal-aid programs, additional funds are 
distributed to ensure that each State receives an additional 
amount based on equity considerations. This minimum guarantee 
provision ensures that each State will have a return of 90.5 
percent on its share of contributions to the highway account of 
the Highway Trust Fund. To achieve the minimum guarantee each 
fiscal year, $2,800,000,000 nationally is available to the 
States as though they are STP funds (except that requirements 
related to set-asides for transportation enhancements, safety, 
and sub-State allocations do not apply), and any remaining 
amounts are distributed among core highway programs.
    Value pricing program.--As the fiscal year 2003 
applications for the value pricing program are being reviewed, 
the Committee encourages FHWA to support the data collection 
phase of the pay-as-you-drive variable pricing research program 
in Atlanta, GA.
    Emergency relief.--This program provides for the repair and 
reconstruction of Federal-aid highways and Federally-owned 
roads which have suffered serious damage as the result of 
natural disasters or catastrophic failures. TEA21 restates the 
program eligibility specifying that emergency relief (ER) funds 
can be used only for emergency repairs to restore essential 
highway traffic, to minimize the extent of damage resulting 
from a natural disaster or catastrophic failure, or to protect 
the remaining facility and make permanent repairs. If ER funds 
are exhausted, the Secretary of Transportation may borrow funds 
from other highway programs.
    High priority projects.--TEA21 includes 1,850 high priority 
projects specified by the Congress. Funding for these projects 
totals $9,359,850,000 over the 6 year period with a specified 
percentage of the project funds made available each year. 
Unlike demonstration projects in the past, the funds for TEA21 
high priority projects are subject to the Federal-aid 
obligation limitation, but the obligation limitation associated 
with the projects does not expire.
    Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act 
(TIFIA).--Programs authorized under the Transportation 
Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) provide 
credit assistance on flexible terms directly to public-private 
sponsors of major surface transportation projects to assist 
them in gaining access to the capital markets. The Committee 
believes that TIFIA is an important part of the Federal 
Government's overall infrastructure investment effort--one that 
is likely to grow in importance and size in the future. 
Unfortunately, demand for resources under the program has not 
kept pace with the contract authority available under TEA21. As 
such, the program is expected to carry an unspent balance of 
over $100,000,000 into fiscal year 2003. The Committee believes 
that the carryover balances will adequately cover the likely 
demand for projects in 2003. As such, the Committee has used 
the program's contract authority to augment funding for the 
Transportation and Community and System Preservation Pilot 
Program (TCSP), the National Corridor Planning and Development 
Program, and the Coordinated Border Infrastructure and Safety 
Program. Demand for resources under these programs will far 
outstrip current authorizations in 2003.
    National corridor planning and border infrastructure 
programs.--TEA21 created a national corridor planning and 
development program that identifies funds for planning, design, 
and construction of highway corridors of national significance, 
economic growth, and international or interregional trade. 
Allocations may be made to corridors identified in section 
1105(c) of ISTEA and to other corridors using considerations 
outlined in legislation. The coordinated border infrastructure 
program is established to improve the safe movement of people 
and goods at or across the U.S./Mexico and U.S/Canada borders.
    Funds provided for the National Corrider and Border 
Infrastructure Program shall be available for the following 
activities:

        Project                                                   Amount
Alameda Corridor East, Rail-Highway Grade Separation 
    Ontario CA..........................................      $1,000,000
Appalachian North-South Corridor Planning Study, MD.....       2,000,000
Charlotte/Mecklenburg County N/S Transitway, NC.........       3,000,000
Coalfields Expressway, McDowell County, WV..............       9,000,000
Continental--1 Hwy Corridor, Cambria County, PA.........       1,000,000
Cottondale-Holt Highway, AL.............................       6,000,000
Everett Development 41st Street Interchange, WA.........       1,000,000
Fall River--Route 79 Improvements, MA...................       1,000,000
FAST Corridor Project, WA...............................      10,000,000
Ft. Wainwright Alternative Access & Chena River 
    Crossing, AK........................................       2,000,000
Hoover Dam Bridge Bypass, AZ............................       6,000,000
Hwy 412, Widening, Paragould, Hwy 141, AR...............       7,000,000
Hwy-28 Expansion, Vernon Parish, LA.....................       4,500,000
I-5, SR 542 Widening Sunset Drive Orleans to Britton 
    Rd., WA.............................................       2,000,000
I-5 Trade Corridor, OR..................................       4,000,000
I-10/I-12 Split to Seigen Lane, Baton Route, LA.........       4,500,000
I-10/LA1 Interchange Bypass, West Baton Rouge Parish, LA       1,000,000
I-15 widening project, North Las Vegas, NV..............       1,000,000
I-20 Garrett Road Monroe, LA............................       1,000,000
I-35-E Widening, Dallas and Ellis Counties, TX..........       5,000,000
I-49 Northern Extension, LA.............................       4,500,000
I-49 Southern Extension, LA.............................       4,500,000
I-69 Anderson to Flagship Park Center, IN...............       2,000,000
I-69 Construction, TX...................................       5,000,000
I-74 Bridge Project, IA.................................       5,000,000
I-80 Colfax Narrows Project, CA.........................       1,000,000
I-85 Extension from Montgomery to I-20/59, AL...........       1,000,000
Japonski Island Road, AK................................       1,000,000
Kenai Peninsula Borough Road Improvements, AK...........       1,000,000
Jonesboro Overpass, AR..................................       1,000,000
King Coal Highway, Mercer County, WV....................       9,000,000
LA 1 Embankment Stabilization Improvements, LA..........       4,500,000
LA 11 St. Tammamy Parish, LA............................         500,000
LA 820, Lincoln Parish, LA..............................       1,000,000
East-West Highway, ME...................................       3,000,000
Mill Plain Boulevard at I-205, WA.......................       3,500,000
Missisquoi Bay Bridge Reconstruction, VT................       5,000,000
New Route 905, Otay Mesa to I-5/I-85m, CA...............       5,000,000
North Country Trans. Study, Plattsburgh/Watertown, NY...       3,000,000
Olathe 127th Street Overpass, KS........................       2,000,000
Osceola Toll Parkway, AR................................       2,000,000
Panama City Beach, Florida West Bay Bridge Project, FL..       3,000,000
Peach St. Corridor Improvement Project, PA..............       2,600,000
Pearl River Bridge Connector, I-55 to SR 475 Jackson, MS       8,000,000
Polk County Highway 22 Project, OR......................       2,000,000
Route 24/140 Interchange, MA............................       1,500,000
Rt-12 Corridor Improvement Project, NY..................       6,000,000
Rt-403 Relocation, East Greenwich/North Kingstown, RI...       4,000,000
SR-130 Right of Way Willamson, Guadalupe, Travis and 
    Caldwell, TX........................................      10,000,000
SR-332 Reconstruction at I-69, Delaware County, IN......       1,800,000
Sunland Park Dr. Border Rd. Extension, NM...............       5,000,000
Tuscaloosa Eastern Bypass, AL...........................      12,000,000
US-5 Improvements from Derby to Barton, VT..............       2,000,000
US-23 Buford Hwy Pedestrian Safety Project, GA..........       1,000,000
US-26 Widening SB-Heartland Expressway, NE..............       3,000,000
US-35/Route 34 to I-64, Putnam County, WV...............       4,000,000
US-51 to MS-43 Connector Road, Canton, MS...............       1,200,000
US-60 widening in Butler County, MO.....................       8,000,000
US-85/C-470 Santa Fe Interchange, CO....................       6,000,000
US-95, milepost 536 stage 2 construction, Boundary 
    County, ID..........................................       1,400,000
US-287, Wiley Junction Improvements, CO.................       5,000,000
US-395, North Spokane Corridor,WA.......................       5,000,000
US-412, AR..............................................       8,000,000
US 17/521 Improvements, Georgetown, SC..................       2,500,000
US 278 Highway Safety Modifications, SC.................       4,000,000
WV Route 10, Logan County, WV...........................       8,000,000
Yakima Grade Separation, WA.............................       3,500,000

    Ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities.--Section 1207 of 
TEA21 reauthorized funding for the construction of ferry boats 
and ferry terminal facilities.
    Funds provided for the Ferry boats and ferry terminal 
facilities program under the Committee recommendation shall be 
available for the following activities in the corresponding 
amounts:
        Project                                                   Amount

Beale Street Landing/Docking Facility Memphis, TN.......        $500,000
Coffman Cove/Wrangell/Petersburg Ferries & Ferry 
    Facility, AK........................................       1,200,000
Corpus Christi Ferry Terminal, TX.......................         500,000
Dock Construction for Hickman/Fulton County, Riverport, 
    KY..................................................       1,000,000
Ferry Boat Replacement for Rockland and Vinalhaven, ME..       2,750,000
Fire Island Ferry Terminal, Saltaire, NY................         800,000
Friday Harbor Ferry Terminal Preservation, WA...........       2,000,000
Kitsap Transit, Sidney Landing Terminal, WA.............       2,000,000
Middle Bass Ferry Dock Improvements, phase II, OH.......         750,000
North Carolina Shipyard, Manns Harbor, NC...............       1,000,000
San Francisco Bay Area Water Transit Authority Ferry 
    Project, 
    CA..................................................       2,500,000
Ship Island Terminal, Gulfport, MS......................         500,000
Stamford Ferry Terminal, CT.............................       1,000,000
Vallejo Baylink Ferry, Terminal and Facilities, CA......       1,500,000
TEA21 Setaside..........................................      20,000,000

    National scenic byways program.--This program provides 
funding for roads that are designated by the Secretary of 
Transportation as All American Roads (AAR) or National Scenic 
Byways (NSB). These roads have outstanding scenic, historic, 
cultural, natural, recreational, and archaeological qualities. 
The Committee recommendation provides $26,500,000 for this 
program in fiscal year 2002.
    Transportation and community and system preservation pilot 
program.--TEA21 created a new transportation and community and 
system preservation program that provides grants to States and 
local governments for planning, developing, and implementing 
strategies to integrate transportation and community and system 
preservation plans and projects. These grants may be used to 
improve the efficiency of the transportation system, reduce 
transportation externalities and the need for future 
infrastructure investment, and improve transportation 
efficiency and access consistent with community character. 
Funds provided for this program for fiscal year 2003 shall be 
available for the following activities:

        Project                                                   Amount

Aberdeen Downtown Revitalization, WA....................        $100,000
Alexandria, Third St. Downtown Reconnect Project, LA....         400,000
Amsterdam Revitalization Waterfront, NY.................         500,000
Antelope Valley Overpass, Lincoln, NE...................       1,000,000
Atchinson Riverfront Access Parkway Project, KS.........       1,000,000
Bagley Road Pedestrian Project, Berea, OH...............       1,300,000
Bellingham Central Avenue Pedestrian Corridor, WA.......         250,000
Billings Railroad Separation Study, MT..................         100,000
Boston Long Island Pier ADA Compliance, MA..............         200,000
Camp Corsuch Road & Related Improvements, AK............         500,000
Charles Town Gateway Revitalization Project, WV.........         300,000
Charleston Renaissance Gateway Project, WV..............         950,000
Concord 20/20 Vision initiative, NH.....................         500,000
Dover Lincoln Park Center Project, DE...................         400,000
East Grand Forks Greenway, MN...........................         500,000
Eugene Federal Courthouse Area Concept Development, OR..       1,000,000
Fairbanks Street Improvements & Bike Path, AK...........         300,000
Falmouth-Yarmouth Bike Path, MA.........................         200,000
Flandreau Santee Sioux Traibe Bicycle and Walking Path, 
    SD..................................................         200,000
Fort Campbell Improvements, KY..........................         750,000
Frink Park Pier Project, Clayton, NY....................         250,000
Girdwood Road Culvery Improvement, AK...................         600,000
Granite Street Project, Manchester, NH..................         350,000
Gulf of Maine Research Laboratory, Park/Ped., ME........         200,000
Hamilton Twp Pedestrian Overpass, NJ....................         250,000
Highway-79 Corridor Greenway Project, AL................         500,000
I-40 and Avenue ``F'', City Ramp Project, OK............         500,000
I-40/Paseo del Volcan Interchange, Albuquerque NM.......         750,000
I-55/Main St. Intersection, MO..........................         100,000
Kansas City East/West Connector, MO.....................         500,000
Lewis and Clark Bicentennial Interpretive Trail, 
    Mobridge SD.........................................         250,000
Lewis and Clark Shared Use Path, ND.....................         675,000
Lithonia Streetscape Project, GA........................       1,000,000
Living Wall project, Farmington Hills, MI...............         400,000
MD-404 Shore Highway Phase II, MD.......................       1,000,000
Museum Campus Trolleys, Chicago, IL.....................         500,000
Nashville Rolling Mill Hills, TN........................         500,000
Newberg-Dundee Transportation Improvement Project, OR...         775,000
Northside Drive Corridor Design, Clinton, MS............       1,000,000
Odessa Transportation Plan, DE..........................         100,000
Ohio River Trail--Salem to Downtown, Cincinnati, OH.....         350,000
Oklahoma Transportation Center Improvements, OK.........         500,000
Old Route 66, Streetscape Phase I, Moriarity, NM........         400,000
Orange County Congestion Program, CA....................       1,000,000
Owensboro Waterfront Development Project, KY............         750,000
Port of Anchorage road improvements, AK.................         600,000
Paintsville Lake Access Road, KY........................         500,000
Pennyrile Parkway Improvements, KY......................         750,000
Portsmouth Piscaraqu Riverwalk, NH......................         500,000
Providence Road Trail Project, Virginia Beach,VA........         400,000
Ruffner Mountain Nature Center, AL......................         500,000
Selma Riverfront Project, AL............................         500,000
Shoreline Interurban Trail Construction Project, WA.....         400,000
South Bend Studebaker Corridor, Industrial Park, IN.....         500,000
Springfield Downtown Redevelopment Project, VT..........       1,500,000
SR202/I-70 Interchange improvement, OH..................         750,000
Thea Foss Waterway Environmental Protection and 
    Transportation Impact Study, WA.....................         500,000
Tulsa Trail System, Broken Arrow, OK....................       1,250,000
Ulster County Visitor Center, NY........................       1,000,000
Union City, NJ Traffic Signalization Project, NJ........       1,000,000
US-50 Reconstruction, Dodge City, KS....................       1,000,000
Vanderbilt Children's Hospital, TN......................         250,000
Virginia Corridor Greenway Pilot Project, Modesto, CA...         500,000
Wakulla County Florida, US-319 Expansion, FL............         250,000
Watertown Community Trail Extension, SD.................         100,000
Yorktown Waterfront Revitalization & Streetscape, VA....       1,000,000
10th Street South Project, St. Cloud, MN................       1,000,000
19th Ave. North Extension/Reconstruction, Clinton, IA...       1,500,000
19th St./Rimrock Way Ped. Improvements, Redmond OR......         100,000

                 Appalachian Development Highway System

Appropriations, 2002....................................    $200,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \1\...............................................
Committee recommendation................................     200,000,000

\1\ The budget estimate requests funding under the Federal-Aid Highway 
obligation limitation.

    The Committee recommendation includes $200,000,000 for the 
Appalachian Development Highway System (ADHS). The amount 
provided is the same as the fiscal year 2002 comparable level. 
Funding for this initiative is authorized under section 1069(y) 
of Public Law 102-240--the Intermodal Surface Transportation 
Efficiency Act. The ADHS program provides funds for the 
construction of the Appalachian corridor highways in the 13 
States that comprise the Appalachian region. These highways, in 
many instances, are intended to replace some of the most 
deficient and dangerous segments of rural roadway in America.

                 Limitation on Transportation Research

Limitation, 2002 \1\....................................    $447,500,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \1\ ..............................     462,500,000
Committee recommendation................................     462,500,000

\1\ Resources available in fiscal year 2002 and requested in fiscal year 
2003 are assumed within the Federal aid highway obligation limitation in 
the budget request for fiscal year 2003.

    The limitation controls spending for the transportation 
research and technology programs of the FHWA. This limitation 
includes the intelligent transportation systems, surface 
transportation research, technology deployment, training and 
education, and university transportation research. The 
Committee recommendation provides an obligation limitation for 
transportation research of $462,500,000. This limitation is 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
consistent with the provisions of TEA21.

Surface transportation research.........................    $103,000,000
Technology deployment program...........................      50,000,000
Training and education..................................      20,000,000
Bureau of Transportation Statistics.....................      31,000,000
ITS standards, research, operational tests, and 
    development.........................................     110,000,000
ITS deployment..........................................     122,000,000
University transportation research......................      26,500,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal..........................................     462,500,000

    Highway research and development.--The Committee 
appreciates the improvement in the justification accompanying 
the budget request and notes the presentation of the surface 
research estimate separate from the presentation of the 
technology deployment funding estimate.

Environment, planning, and real estate..................     $16,774,000
Research and technology program support.................       8,545,000
International research..................................         500,000
Structures..............................................      13,085,000
Safety..................................................      12,490,000
Highway operations......................................      13,101,000
Asset management........................................       3,290,000
Pavements research......................................      15,200,000
Policy research.........................................       8,510,000
Long Term Pavement Project (LTPP).......................      10,000,000
Advanced Research.......................................         750,000
R&T strategic planning/performance measures.............         755,000

    Environment, planning, and real estate.--The Committee 
recommendation includes $16,774,000 for environment, planning, 
and real estate research, which is $4,221,000 more than the 
budget estimate. Within the funds provided for this research 
activity, the Committee has provided $800,000 to continue dust 
and persistent particulate abatement research in Kotzebue, 
Alaska.
    Research and technology program support.--The Committee 
recommends $8,545,000, an increase of $1,462,000 from the 
budget request and $410,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 
enacted level. Within the funds available for research and 
technology, the Committee has provided $750,000 for the Center 
on Coastal Transportation Research at the University of South 
Alabama.
    International research.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $500,000 for international research. This is the same 
amount provided in fiscal year 2002 and is consistent with the 
amount authorized under TEA21.
    Structures.--The Committee has provided $13,085,000 for 
structures research, an increase of $4,067,000 from the budget 
request. This research effort allows FHWA reduce deficiencies 
on National Highway System bridges and should facilitate 
continued progress on high performance materials and 
engineering applications to design, repair, retrofit, inspect, 
and rehabilitate bridges. The Committee directs the FHWA to 
continue its collaborative research effort with West Virginia 
University's Construct Facilities Center regarding research 
into composite structure and related engineering research. 
Within the funds for this research activity, the Committee has 
provided $500,000 for a demonstration project to evaluate the 
use of battery-powered cathodic protection to extend the life 
of concrete bridges that are located in extreme cold weather 
conditions. The Committee recommendation also includes $500,000 
to support non-destructive structural evaluation technology at 
the New Mexico State University's Bridge Research Center.
    Safety.--The Committee recommendation provides $12,490,000 
for safety research, an increase of $2,973,000 above the budget 
estimate. These funds will allow FHWA to continue to accelerate 
the substantial progress being made on technologies or 
strategies to reduce run-off-road crashes, improve night-time 
driving, reduce the frequency of crashes at intersections, 
improve pedestrian safety, and develop, test, and refine the 
Interactive Highway Safety Design Model. Within the funds 
provided, the Committee included $1,500,000 to conduct research 
into heavy vehicle safety, and vulnerability assessments 
regarding security and safety in all modes of transportation at 
a not-for-profit, technology oriented entity in the Pacific 
Northwest with demonstrated research capabilities to address 
issues of braking, vehicle electrification and human factors.
    Highway operations.--The Committee recommendation provides 
$13,101,000 for research activities regarding highway 
operations, which is $3,309,000 more than the budget request. 
Within these funds, the Committee has included $1,200,000 to 
analyze existing conditions and make recommendations that will 
enhance the freight mobility transportation system in 
Washington State.
    Asset management.--The Committee recommends $3,290,000 for 
asset management research activities, an increase of $631,000 
from the budget estimate.
    Policy.--The Committee recommendation includes $8,510,000, 
an increase of $180,000 from the fiscal year 2002 enacted level 
and an increase of $1,263,000 above the budget estimate.
    Pavements research.--The Committee recommends $15,200,000 
for highway pavement research, including work on asphalt, 
Portland cement pavement research, polymer additives, and 
recycled materials. This is $4,799,000 more than the budget 
estimate and $1,447,000 more than the fiscal year 2002 enacted 
level. Within the funds provided, the Committee has included 
$1,000,000 to the Center for Portland Cement Concrete Pavement 
Technology at Iowa State University; $1,000,000 to continue 
evaluation of GSB-88 emulsified binder treatment application; 
$1,250,000 for the National Center for Asphalt Technology 
(NCAT) and $1,000,000 to continue research related to silica 
fume high performance concrete.
    Advanced research.--The Committee recommendation deletes 
$203,000 from the budget request and provides $750,000. The 
Committee notes the many of the proposed areas of research and 
technology investigation duplicate efforts in other research 
activities and in the ITS research program.
    R&T strategic planning and performance measures.--The 
Committee has provided $755,000 for research and technology 
strategic planning and performance measures, an increase of 
$27,000 from the budget request. The Committee anticipates that 
this level of funding will be sufficient to support planned 
strategic planning activities, research outreach, and 
development and refinement of performance measures, as required 
by the Government Performance and Results Act (GPRA).
    Other.--The Committee supports the FHWA effort with AASHTO, 
TRB, among others in advancing a national R&T agenda in the 
areas of safety, infrastructure renewal, operations and 
mobility, planning and environment, and policy analysis and 
systems monitoring. The Committee recognizes the benefits of 
improved communication and coordination between key partners 
and stakeholders, and awaits completion of the synthesis report 
on the partnership initiative.
    ITS Standards, Research, Operational Tests, Development, 
and Deployment.--The Committee recommends that the $232,000,000 
authorized in TEA21 for ITS research and associated activities 
in fiscal year 2002 be allocated in the following manner:

Research and Development................................     $50,701,000
Operational Tests.......................................      10,782,000
Evaluation/Program Policy Assessment....................       6,739,000
Architecture and Standards..............................      18,868,000
Program Support.........................................      11,455,000
Integration.............................................      11,455,000
ITS Deployment Incentive Program........................     122,000,000

    Specified ITS deployment projects.--It is the intent of the 
Committee that the following projects contribute to the 
integration and interoperability for intelligent transportation 
systems in metropolitan and rural areas as provided under 
section 5208 of TEA21 and promote deployment of the commercial 
vehicle intelligent transportation system infrastructure as 
provided under section 5209 of TEA21. Funding for deployment 
activities are to be available as follows:

        Project                                                   Amount
Advance Traveler Info. System & Smart Card System, OH...      $2,500,000
Alaska Statewide: Smart Emergency Medical Access System.       3,000,000
Boston Traffic Monitoring & Security System, MA.........       2,000,000
Bozeman Pass Wildlife Channelization Study, MT..........         500,000
Cargo Mate Logistics and Intermodal Management System, 
    NY..................................................       5,000,000
Cary, Computerized Traffic Signal System, NC............       1,000,000
CCTA Burlington Multimodal Transit Center, VT...........       1,000,000
Center for Injury Sciences at UAB, Crash Notification, 
    AL..................................................       2,000,000
Central Florida Regional Trans. Authority, Orange/
    Seminole ITS, FL....................................       2,000,000
Chinatown Intermodal Trans. Center, Los Angeles, CA.....       2,500,000
Concord Parkway, Traffic Signals, NC....................       1,500,000
CVISN, NM...............................................       1,125,000
Flint Mass Transportation Authority ITS program, MI.....       1,000,000
Intelligent Transportation Center, Atlanta, GA..........         750,000
GMU, ITS Research, VA...................................       2,000,000
Great Lakes ITS program, MI.............................       4,000,000
Harrison County Sheriff's Department, ITS, MS...........       1,000,000
Hoosier SAFE-T, IN......................................       3,000,000
Huntsville, AL..........................................       2,000,000
I-80 Dynamic Message Signs, Southern WY.................       4,000,000
Idaho CVISN.............................................       2,250,000
Illinois Statewide......................................       5,000,000
Iowa Statewide ITS......................................       1,650,000
Kansas City Scout, Advanced Traffic Management System, 
    KS..................................................       1,500,000
Kansas City SmartPort...................................       1,000,000
Kent, Intracity Transit Project, WA.....................       1,500,000
Lynnwood ITS, WA........................................       2,000,000
Maine Statewide, Rural Advanced Traveler Info. System, 
    ME..................................................       2,000,000
Maryland Statewide ITS..................................       2,000,000
Missouri Statewide Rural ITS, MO........................       2,000,000
NDSU Advanced Traffic Analysis Center, ND...............       1,000,000
Nebraska statewide ITS..................................       5,000,000
New Bedford ITS Port Information Center, MA.............       1,000,000
Oklahoma Statewide ITS..................................       7,000,000
Program of Projects, WA.................................       5,500,000
Providence Transportation Information Center, ITS, RI...       2,000,000
Sacramento Area Council of Governments, ITS, CA.........       1,000,000
Shreveport ITS Project, LA..............................       1,000,000
South Carolina Statewide ITS............................       6,000,000
SR-68/Riverside Dr. ITS, Espanola, NM...................         475,000
Surface Transportation Institute, Univ. of North Dakota, 
    ND..................................................       1,500,000
T-REX Southeast Corridor Multi-Modal Project, CO........       9,000,000
Tucson ER-LINK ITS project, AZ..........................       1,250,000
Univ. of Nebraska Lincoln, SMART Transportation, NE.....       2,000,000
University of Kentucky Transportation Center, KY........       2,000,000
Utah Commuter Link, Davis and Utah Counties, UT.........       1,000,000
Vermont Statewide Rural Advanced Traveler System, VT....       1,500,000
Vermont Variable Message Signs, VT......................       1,000,000
Washington DC Metro ITS.................................       4,000,000
Willowbrook Avenue Rail Safety Program--Compton, CA.....       2,000,000
Wisconsin State Patrol Mobile Data Communications 
    Network.............................................       2,000,000

    Illinois ITS.--The Committee provides $5,000,000 to the 
Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) for Intelligent 
Transportation Systems grants. The Committee expects IDOT to 
fund the following projects: $750,000 to Lake County for 
traffic corridor communications systems; $450,000 to DuPage 
County for traffic signal coordination; $850,000 for an I-55/
Lake Springfield Fixed Anti-Icing System; $800,000 to the 
Village of Bourbonnais for congestion relief projects; and 
$150,000 for the city of Marion's traffic control project. The 
Committee further provides $2,000,000 to the city of Chicago 
for Intelligent Transportation Systems grants, including the 
Cicero Avenue Traveler Information project and the Traffic 
Management Center.

           Nationwide Differential Global Positioning System

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $6,000,000 
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      6,000,000 
Committee recommendation \2\............................     (6,000,000)

\1\ Funding derived from limitation on administrative expenses.
\2\ Funding for NDGPS provided within FAA ``facilities and equipment'' 
account.

    NDGPS.--The Committee recommendation includes $6,000,000 
for continued investment in the Nationwide NPGPS Network. The 
funding is provided within the FAA's facilities and equipment 
account.

                  Bureau of Transportation Statistics


                      (LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS)

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $31,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \1\...............................      31,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      31,000,000

\1\ Does not reflect $675,000 requested to cover full funding of Federal 
retiree costs.

    The Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) was 
established in section 6006 of the Intermodal Surface 
Transportation Efficiency Act [ISTEA], to compile, analyze, and 
make accessible information on the Nation's transportation 
systems, collect information on intermodal transportation, and 
enhance the quality and effectiveness of the statistical 
programs of the Department of Transportation.

                          Federal-Aid Highways


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002

                                                         $30,000,000,000

Budget estimate, 2003

                                                          29,000,000,000
Committee recommendation
                                                          32,000,000,000

    The Committee recommends a liquidating cash appropriation 
of $32,000,000,000.

              FEDERAL MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    In December 1999, the Congress passed the Motor Carrier 
Safety Improvement Act (Public Law 106-159), which established 
the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) within 
the Department of Transportation. Prior to this legislation, 
motor carrier safety responsibilities were housed within the 
Federal Highway Administration.
    The preeminent mission of the FMCSA is to improve the 
safety of commercial vehicle operations on the nation's 
highways. A primary goal of the agency is to reduce the number 
of accidents and fatalities due to truck accidents. FMCSA 
resources and activities contribute to safety in commercial 
vehicle operations through enforcement, safety regulation, 
technological innovation, improvements in information systems, 
training, and improvements to commercial driver's license 
testing, record keeping, and sanctions. To achieve these goals, 
the FMCSA works with Federal, State, and local enforcement 
agencies, the motor carrier industry, and highway safety 
organizations.

                          Motor Carrier Safety


                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

    The Motor Carrier Safety program provides for the salaries, 
operating expenses, research funding for the FMCSA. The Motor 
Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) amended Section 
104(a)(1) of title 23 to provide one-third of 1 percent of the 
administrative takedown to be made available to administer 
motor carrier safety programs and motor carrier research. The 
administration's budget requests a takedown of 45/100 of 1 
percent for these purposes.

                  LIMITATION ON ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSE

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................    $110,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 (limitation)......................     117,464,000
Committee recommendation \2\............................     117,464,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $158,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
87, as amended by Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Includes $3,000,000 provided from FHWA's administrative takedown.

    The Committee recommendation provides a total of 
$117,464,000 for operating expenses and research funding for 
the FMCSA consistent with the budget request. Of the funds 
provided, $110,464,000 is for operating expenses and $7,000,000 
is for research and technology initiatives. The recommendation 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
provides the following adjustments to the budget request:

Share the Road Safely......................................... -$100,000
Safety is Good Business Program...............................  -250,000
R&T Information Dissemination.................................  -150,000
Hazardous Materials Safety and Security.......................  +500,000

    Domestic motor carrier safety.--While FMCSA has moved 
expeditiously to implement the United States-Mexico cross-
border trucking safety provisions, the Committee remains 
concerned about the lack of progress that has been made in 
commercial motor vehicle safety in recent years. Despite the 
fact that there has been a nearly 50 percent increase in 
funding for motor carrier safety activities since the FMCSA was 
created in 1999, there has been only a 3.5 percent decrease in 
the number of fatalities involving large truck crashes. In 
fact, more than one out of ten people killed in motor vehicle 
incidents are involved in a crash with a large truck even 
though large trucks represent a very small percentage of total 
registered vehicles. Given this record, it calls into question 
whether the FMCSA will achieve its 1999 goal of reducing truck 
deaths and injuries by 50 percent by 2009.
    The Committee reminds FMCSA that the agency's safety 
oversight efforts for domestic truck traffic should be equal 
to, if not greater than, those for cross-border traffic. The 
fact that it takes FMCSA an average of 4 years to complete a 
rulemaking and that many rules have not been published by their 
statutory deadlines is evidence that the agency has a long way 
to go in pursuing its safety mission. Furthermore, in the 
aftermath of the events of September 11th, the Committee urges 
FMCSA to be particularly attentive to the security risks 
associated with the commercial driver's license program and the 
transportation of hazardous materials as discussed in greater 
detail in this report.
    Commercial drivers license oversight.--Federal regulations 
require individuals to carry a commercial driver's license 
(CDL) when operating a commercial motor vehicle weighing in 
excess of 26,001 pounds, when hauling hazardous materials or 
when transporting at least 16 passengers. Over the last decade, 
the number of CDL holders has doubled to over 10.5 million 
today and it is estimated that nearly 470,000 new CDLs are 
issued each year. Since truck travel volume is expected to 
increase roughly 20 percent over the next decade, it is 
critically important that FMCSA put adequate safety measures in 
place to effectively monitor the commercial motor vehicle 
industry and commercial motor vehicle drivers. The fiscal year 
2002 Supplemental Appropriations bill included $17,300,000 for 
FMCSA to boost CDL fraud detection and prevention efforts as 
well as to conduct background check reviews of CDL drivers who 
hold or seek hazardous materials endorsements. These additional 
funds will assist FMCSA in its efforts to address the 
deficiencies in the CDL licensing and testing program that were 
outlined in the Inspector General's May, 2002 report. The 
Committee notes that the FMCSA concurred with nearly all of the 
IG's recommendations with the exception of the IG's 
recommendation to require covert procedures for monitoring 
State and third-party CDL examiners. Given the expected growth 
in the number of CDL holders, it is essential that FMCSA 
conduct timely compliance reviews of state CDL programs as well 
as utilize covert monitoring techniques of State and third-
party CDL examiners. As such, the Committee directs FMSCA to 
adopt a standard that requires covert monitoring in the menu of 
oversight activities for State and third-party CDL examiners.
    Hazardous materials transportation.--Every day in the 
United States, there are over 800,000 shipments of hazardous 
materials ranging from flammable materials and explosives to 
poisons and corrosives. The Committee commends FMCSA for 
completing over 38,000 security sensitivity visits of hazardous 
materials transportation and other at-risk providers earlier 
this year. These visits have served to increase the level of 
awareness of hazardous materials carriers to terrorist threats 
and to identify potential security vulnerabilities for 
corrective or law enforcement action. However, the Committee 
firmly believes that FMCSA must continue to aggressively 
monitor the safety and security vulnerabilities in the 
transportation of hazardous materials since 90 percent of 
hazardous material shipments occur by truck. The Committee 
urges FMCSA to vigorously enforce compliance with Federal 
hazardous materials regulations and to encourage States to 
appropriately utilize the motor carrier safety assistance 
program for hazardous materials training and enforcement. With 
regard to hazardous materials safety and security research, the 
Committee provides $758,000 which is $500,000 more than the 
budget request. The additional funds above the budget request 
shall be used to expand and expedite the completion of FMCSA's 
hazardous materials security risk assessments.
    ``Safety is Good Business'' Program.--The Committee has 
deleted the funding for this initiative in the motor carrier 
research program. The Committee believes that the ``Safety is 
Good Business'' program should be funded out of FMCSA's high 
priority initiatives program within the motor carrier safety 
assistance program.
    Crash causation study.--The Committee recommends $5,000,000 
for the continuation of FMCSA's comprehensive crash causation 
study. The Committee appreciates the complexity of this study 
which now involves over 100 Federal, state and contractor 
support personnel. Over 450 crashes have been investigated, but 
many of these have not been completely coded. The Committee 
understands that the FMCSA sought out a Transportation Research 
Board committee to review the first set of large truck crash 
causation cases and to make recommendations on what coding 
changes may be necessary. The Committee reiterates its message 
from last year that it is imperative that the results of this 
study should be made available as soon as possible. The study's 
results will assist FMCSA in setting safety priorities as well 
as serve as useful tool for Congressional oversight and 
legislative activities. The Committee directs FMCSA and NHTSA 
to submit a letter report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by March 15, 2003 indicating the study's 
progress; the Department's response to and status of TRB's 
recommendations; and, a time schedule for the release of its 
initial results.
    Share the road safely.--The Committee provides a total of 
$600,000 for the ``Share the Road Safely'' program which is 
designed to educate the motoring public on how to share the 
road safely with large trucks and buses. As required by the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century, $500,000 of the 
funds provided for this program are transferred from NHTSA's 
highway safety program account. While this program is 
administered by the FMCSA, the Committee believes that NHTSA 
should have input into the program's development since NHTSA is 
the agency with primary responsibility for the behavioral 
programs geared toward passenger car drivers. The Committee 
urges FMCSA to coordinate the agency's ``share the road'' 
efforts with NHTSA.
    Young driver pilot program.--In February, 2001, the FMCSA 
requested comments on a proposal that the agency had received 
to initiate a pilot program which would waive Federal 
regulations to allow individuals between the ages of 18 and 21 
to work in truck driver jobs in interstate commerce. Current 
Federal safety regulations require that commercial motor 
vehicle drivers be at least 21 years of age. The Committee is 
aware that FMCSA has received comments from state 
transportation officials and private citizens opposing this 
proposal due to safety concerns. Given the fact that young 
drivers are overrepresented in motor vehicle crashes, the 
Committee is not convinced of the merits of this proposal. 
Prior to the approval of such a pilot program, the Committee 
directs the FMCSA Administrator to conduct a thorough analysis 
of the safety ramifications and whether there's a genuine 
shortage of truck drivers to warrant such a waiver of the 
Federal safety regulations.
    Driver record improvements.--Section 204 of the Motor 
Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 1999 (MCSIA) requires States 
to query the National Driver Register (NDR) and the Commercial 
Driver's License Information System prior to issuing or 
renewing a motor vehicle operator's license. The Committee 
notes that the rule implementing this provision has yet to be 
promulgated and would remind FMCSA and NHTSA that each agency 
shares an equal responsibility for fulfilling the MCSIA 
requirement. However, progress on this rule has been stalled 
because each agency believes that the other has the lead on the 
rule's development. The Committee directs the Secretary to 
assign either FMCSA or NHTSA as the lead agency in the rule's 
development and urges both agencies to move forward 
expeditiously on this rule as other driver record improvements, 
such as the one-driver, one-record pointer system, are further 
developed. In that regard, the Committee directs NHTSA and 
FMCSA to conduct an analysis of the costs associated with the 
development of a one-driver, one-record pointer system and the 
strategic steps necessary for its implementation and submit 
that analysis to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by June 1, 2003.
    Driver research.--Within the funds provided for FMCSA's 
research and technology program, the Committee provides 
$700,000 for the Transportation Research Institute at the 
George Washington University VA Campus for advanced research on 
driver error related to fatigue, inattentiveness and sleep 
deprivation through the use of sophisticated in-vehicle 
monitoring and assistance systems related to vehicle 
performance. In addition, the Committee has included $250,000 
to initiate a separate multidisciplinary driver research 
program that evaluates cognitive sensory, environmental, 
mechanical, and large-scale epidemiologic aspects of driver 
behavior in order to identify measures that show promise of 
improving safety and reduce the likelihood of serious injury.

                 National Motor Carrier Safety Program


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                    (Liquidation of
                                       contract         (Limitation on
                                    authorization)       obligations)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............       $205,896,000        $205,896,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........        190,000,000         190,000,000
Committee recommendation........        190,000,000         190,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The FMCSA's National Motor Carrier Safety Program (NMCSP) 
was authorized by TEA21 and amended by the Motor Carrier Safety 
Improvement Act of 1999. This program consists of two major 
areas: the motor carrier safety assistance program (MCSAP) and 
the information systems and strategic safety initiatives 
(ISSSI). MCSAP provides grants and project funding to States to 
develop and implement national programs for the uniform 
enforcement of Federal and State rules and regulations 
concerning motor safety. The major objective of this program is 
to reduce the number and severity of accidents involving 
commercial motor vehicles. Grants are made to qualified States 
for the development of programs to enforce the Federal motor 
carrier safety and hazardous materials regulations and the 
Commercial Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1986. The basic program 
is targeted at roadside vehicle safety inspections of both 
interstate and intrastate commercial motor vehicle traffic. 
ISSSI provides funds to develop and enhance data-related motor 
carrier programs.
    The Committee recommends $190,000,000 in liquidating cash 
for this program consistent with the authorized contract 
activity level.

                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

    The Committee recommends a $190,000,000 limitation on 
obligations for motor carrier safety grants. This is the level 
authorized under the Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act of 
1999, which amended TEA21.
    Truck driver training program.--Within the funds provided 
for FMCSA's high priority initiative program, the Committee 
provides $700,000 for the development of a concrete skid pad at 
Lewis-Clark State College North Lewiston Training Facility. The 
project would enable the creation of controlled ``adverse'' 
weather situations, including ice and rain, as well as faulty 
braking systems, tire blow-outs, and anti-skid equipment 
failure, as part of the Commercial Drivers License Training 
program, which provides safety training for bus and commercial 
motor vehicle drivers.
    Highway watch program.--Within the funds provided for 
FMCSA's high priority initiative program, the Committee 
provides $1,000,000 for the continuation of the Highway Watch 
program. The Highway Watch program trains professional truck 
drivers to recognize and report a variety of incidents on the 
Nation's highways. As the program is expanded to reach an 
increasing number of truck drivers, the Committee urges that a 
security component be included in the training to help truck 
drivers better identify potential security threats.
    Operation respond.--Within the funds provided for FMCSA's 
high priority initiatives, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to 
design, build, and demonstrate the benefits of a seamless 
hazardous materials incident detection, management, and 
response system, including the expansion of the Operation 
Respond network of emergency responders and by linking this 
network with tracking and automatic crash notification 
technologies. The Committee urges that, working with the 
private sector, these funds be used to establish a national 
first responder emergency services network and to accelerate 
deployment of Operation Respond software.

                       BORDER ENFORCEMENT PROGRAM

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $25,866,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      59,967,000
Committee recommendation................................  \1\ 59,967,000

\1\ Funded under FHWA administrative takedown.

    The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), enacted in 
1993, anticipated the initiation of cross-border trucking 
shipments between the United States and Mexico by December, 
1995. The previous Administration made a specific decision not 
to allow Mexico-domiciled motor carriers to transport cross-
border shipments beyond a limited commercial zone into the 
United States due to concerns over the safety of the Mexican 
trucking fleet. In February, 2001, an Arbitral Panel issued a 
finding that the United States was out of compliance with NAFTA 
and could not bar all Mexican applicants from entering the 
United States. However, the Panel clearly stipulated that NAFTA 
did not restrict the ability of the United States to implement 
measures to ensure Mexican trucking companies and Mexican truck 
drivers meet U.S. safety standards.
    Last year, the Committee dedicated a significant amount of 
time and effort to the safety concerns associated with the 
initiation of cross-border trucking shipments between the 
United States and Mexico when the Administration announced its 
intention to open the border by January, 2002. The fiscal year 
2002 Transportation Appropriations Act included a general 
provision which required a number of actions by the Secretary 
of Transportation, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration (FMCSA) and the Inspector General (IG) prior to 
the opening of the United States-Mexico border to commercial 
vehicle traffic beyond the commercial zone. A key provision was 
the requirement that the Inspector General conduct a 
comprehensive review of border operations to verify whether 
safety requirements are in place. The Inspector General's 
report of June 25, 2002 states that the FMCSA has made measured 
progress toward meeting the Act's requirements to hire and 
train inspectors; establish inspection facilities; and develop 
safety processes and procedures for Mexican long-haul carriers.
    However, the IG's report indicates that there are remaining 
issues of concern and the Administration must do more work 
before the border is open. Two areas that need additional 
attention are law enforcement authority's access to databases 
and the ability of States to prosecute Mexican trucks operating 
in violation of U.S. law. Specifically, the IG's report states 
that Mexico's commercial driver's license (CDL) and vehicle 
registration databases are sufficiently accurate and integrated 
into databases. However, 6 of the 25 United States-Mexico 
border crossings do not have adequate access to these databases 
to verify licenses, registration, operating authority or 
insurance. Additionally, the Transportation Act required the IG 
to verify that measures are in place to enable U.S. law 
enforcement authorities to ensure the effective enforcement and 
monitoring of Mexican motor carriers according to U.S. law. The 
IG's report points out only two States--Arizona and 
California--have enacted legislation authorizing their 
enforcement personnel to take action when they encounter a 
vehicle operating without authority. This means that 48 States 
lack any law to put out-of-service or penalize large trucks 
that are caught operating without Federal operating authority. 
The Committee strongly believes that this safety gap needs to 
be closed before the border is open. The Committee was pleased 
at the June 27, 2002 oversight hearing to receive the Secretary 
of Transportation's commitment to include operating authority 
violations among the safety criteria for placing vehicles out 
of service and expects this action to be taken before the 
border is open.
    Finally, Section 350 of the fiscal year 2002 Transportation 
Appropriations Act requires that, prior to the opening of the 
United States-Mexico border to commercial vehicle traffic, the 
Secretary of Transportation must certify in writing in a manner 
addressing the IG's findings a verification that opening the 
border does not pose an unacceptable safety risk to the 
American public. Once the border is open, the full impact of 
these safety requirements can be evaluated as to whether they 
are sufficient. The Committee intends to continue to closely 
monitor the implementation of the United States-Mexico cross-
border trucking provisions to ensure that safety is not 
compromised. The Committee has included a general provision 
continuing the cross-border safety provisions included in the 
2002 Transportation Appropriations Act.
    The Committee recommends $41,967,000 for Federal border 
enforcement staffing and operations and $18,000,000 for State 
operations grants to the southern border States.
    Additional border enforcement funding is provided in this 
bill including $8,250,000 for State operations grants under the 
National Motor Carrier Safety Program, and $47,000,000 for 
inspection station construction under the Federal Highway 
Administrator's administrative takedown.

             NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAFFIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) 
was established as a separate organizational entity in the 
Department of Transportation in March 1970. It succeeded the 
National Highway Safety Bureau, which previously had 
administered traffic and highway safety functions as an 
organizational unit of the Federal Highway Administration.
    The agency's current programs are authorized in four major 
laws: (1) the National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act, 
(chapter 301 of title 49, U.S.C.); (2) the Highway Safety Act, 
(chapter 4 of title 23, U.S.C.); (3) the Motor Vehicle 
Information and Cost Savings (MVICSA) Act, (Part C of subtitle 
VI of title 49, U.S.C.), and (4) the Transportation Equity Act 
for the 21st Century (TEA21).
    The first law provides for the establishment and 
enforcement of safety standards for vehicles and associated 
equipment and the conduct of supporting research, including the 
acquisition of required testing facilities and the operation of 
the national driver register (NDR). Discrete authorizations 
were subsequently established for the NDR under the National 
Driver Register Act of 1982.
    The second law provides for coordinated national highway 
safety programs (section 402) to be carried out by the States 
and for highway safety research, development, and demonstration 
programs (section 403). The Anti-Drug Abuse Act of 1988 (Public 
Law 100-690) authorized a new drunk driving prevention program 
(section 410) to make grants to States to implement and enforce 
drunk driving prevention programs.
    The third law (MVICSA) provides for the establishment of 
low-speed collision bumper standards, consumer information 
activities, diagnostic inspection demonstration projects, 
automobile content labeling, and odometer regulations. An 
amendment to this law established the Secretary's 
responsibility, which was delegated to NHTSA, for the 
administration of mandatory automotive fuel economy standards. 
A 1992 amendment to the MVICSA established automobile content 
labeling requirements.
    The fourth law (TEA21) reauthorizes the full range of NHTSA 
programs and enacts a number of new initiatives. These include: 
safety incentives to prevent operation of motor vehicles by 
intoxicated persons (section 163 of title 23 U.S.C.); seat belt 
incentive grants (section 157 of title 23 U.S.C.); occupant 
protection incentive grants (section 405); and highway safety 
data improvement incentive grant program (section 411). TEA21 
also reauthorized highway safety research, development and 
demonstration programs (section 403) to include research 
measures that may deter drugged driving, educate the motoring 
public on how to share the road safely with commercial motor 
vehicles, and provide vehicle pursuit training for police. 
Finally, TEA21 adopts a number of new motor vehicle safety and 
information provisions, including rulemaking directions for 
improving air bag crash protection systems, lobbying 
restrictions, exemptions from the odometer requirements for 
classes or categories of vehicles the Secretary deems 
appropriate, and adjustments to the automobile domestic content 
labeling requirements.
    In 2000, the Transportation Recall Enhancement, 
Accountability, and Documentation (TREAD) Act amended the 
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act in numerous 
respects and enacted many new initiatives. These consist of a 
number of new motor vehicle safety and information provisions, 
including a requirement that manufacturers give NHTSA notice of 
safety recalls or safety campaigns in foreign countries 
involving motor vehicles or items of motor vehicle equipment 
that are identical or substantially similar to vehicles or 
equipment in the United States; higher civil penalties for 
violations of the law; a criminal penalty for violations of the 
law's reporting requirements; and a number of rulemaking 
directions that include developing a dynamic rollover test for 
light duty vehicles, updating the tire safety and labeling 
standards, improving the safety of child restraints, and 
establishing a child restraint safety rating consumer 
information program.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 Fiscal year      Fiscal year       Committee
                           Program                               2002 enacted    2003 estimate    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Operations and research......................................    $200,264,000     $200,444,508     $215,000,000
National driver register (HTF)...............................      (2,000,000)      (2,000,000)      (2,000,000)
Highway traffic safety grants (firewall).....................     223,000,000      225,000,000      225,000,000
                                                              --------------------------------------------------
      Total..................................................     423,264,000      425,444,508      440,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        Operations and Research


                     (INCLUDING HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                 General Fund      Trust Fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002.........................................     $126,264,000      $74,000,000     $200,264,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \1\....................................      126,444,508       74,000,000      200,444,508
Committee recommendation.....................................      141,000,000       74,000,000      215,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes 4,437,000 for CSRS/FEHB accurals.

    For fiscal year 2003, the Transportation Equity Act for the 
21st Century (TEA21), as amended, authorizes $72,000,000 of 
contract authority from the highway trust fund to finance 
operations and research activities eligible under title 23 
U.S.C. 403. This funding is included within the firewall 
guarantee for highway spending. The act also includes an 
authorization, subject to appropriations, from the highway 
trust fund of $2,000,000 to maintain the National Driver 
Register. In addition, the administration is requesting 
$130,881,000 for activities related to sections 30104 and 32102 
of title 49. This funding is derived from the general fund and 
is subject to appropriations.
    The accompanying bill provides appropriations totaling 
$215,000,000 to be distributed as follows:

                                                               Committee
        Program                                           recommendation
Salaries and benefits...................................     $63,328,000
Travel..................................................       1,324,000
Operating expenses......................................      22,834,000
Contract Programs:
    Safety performance..................................      10,393,000
    Safety assurance....................................      15,760,000
    Highway safety......................................      52,458,000
    Research and analysis...............................      59,396,000
    General administration..............................         657,000
Grant administration reimbursement......................     -11,150,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................     215,000,000

                           OPERATING EXPENSES

    Workforce planning and development.--NHTSA established this 
program in fiscal year 2001 in an effort to encourage college 
students to enter into the fields of engineering, research, 
science and technology, vehicle safety and injury. The 
Committee recognizes the agency's desire to build a base of 
employees for future employment but would note that the 
challenges of attrition in the transportation workforce are not 
unique to NHTSA. The Committee believes that this type of 
workforce planning should be done throughout the entire 
Department of Transportation through the coordination of the 
office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration. The 
Committee includes $300,000 within the NHTSA budget for a more 
measured initiative in this area.
    Contract execution delays.--The Committee is aware that 
there continue to be excessive delays in the timely execution 
of NHTSA contracts. All too frequently, contract recipients 
have had to wait for several months before Federal funds are 
granted. The Committee expects greater attention to this area 
and insists that once a contract has been awarded that it 
should be executed in a timely fashion. The Committee directs 
the NHTSA Administrator to conduct a thorough review of the 
agency's contracting procedures and to take appropriate steps 
to eliminate any unnecessary delays.

                      safety performance standards

    Passenger vehicle tire traction.--The Transportation Recall 
Enhancement, Accountability, and Documentation Act of 2000 
(TREAD) mandated the Secretary to strengthen the Federal 
standards governing tire safety performance. NHTSA issued a 
proposed rulemaking on March 5, 2002, to revise and update its 
tire safety standards. The proposed rule addresses tire safety 
from the vantage point of reducing the chances of tire failure 
principally by increasing tire resistance to heat and high 
speed operation. Although NHTSA has a consumer information 
program, the Uniform Tire Quality Grading System, which assigns 
traction ratings to tires marketed in the United States, there 
is no Federal standard requiring acceptable levels of tire 
adhesion or traction, especially for passenger vehicles 
operating on wet road surfaces. As NHTSA prepares its final 
rule on tire safety performance, the Committee encourages NHTSA 
to consider including standards for tire performance on wet 
road surfaces. Absent such inclusion, the Committee directs 
NHTSA to send a letter to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations explaining why wet road tire performance 
standards were not included.

                            SAFETY ASSURANCE

    Defect information system.--NHTSA's Office of Defect 
Investigation is in the process of replacing its current defect 
database with a new information system. When fully operational, 
this new system, which is being developed by the Volpe National 
Transportation Systems Center, will store consumer complaints 
as well as the early warning data as required by the TREAD Act. 
The Inspector General issued a report earlier this year which 
raised concerns about whether this new information system can 
be successfully implemented on-time and within the estimated 
$5,000,000 budget. The Committee believes that NHTSA should be 
attentive to the concerns raised by the IG and directs NHTSA to 
provide a letter to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations which details the current schedule and cost 
estimate for this system.

                        highway safety programs

    The Committee recommends the following adjustments to the 
budget request:

Occupant protection: Outreach initiatives to increase 
    belt use............................................     +$3,500,000
Emergency medical services..............................      +1,000,000
Impaired driving:
    Judicial/prosecutorial initiative...................      +1,500,000
    Repeat offender tracking model......................      +3,000,000
    Target population outreach..........................      +1,500,000
Motorcycle safety.......................................        +300,000
Drugs, driving and youth................................        +295,000
Highway safety research.................................        +200,000

    National occupant protection program.--The stated 
objectives of NHTSA's occupant protection program are to 
increase seat belt use and decrease the number of child 
occupant fatalities. Over the last several years, NHTSA has set 
aggressive goals for achieving seat belt use across the nation 
since each percentage point increase in seat belt use saves 
approximately 226 lives and prevents over 3,700 injuries each 
year. NHTSA's seat belt goal in 2001 was 86 percent and while 
seat belt use reached an all-time high of 73 percent, the 
agency still fell far short of its national goal. The Committee 
is disappointed that NHTSA's seat belt goal dropped from 87 
percent in 2002 to 78 percent in 2003 and that the agency's 
fiscal year 2003 budget cut its core safety program dedicated 
to national occupant protection by 14 percent. The Committee 
strongly believes that NHTSA must continue to be vigilant and 
creative in its efforts to increase national seat belt use 
particularly for those targeted groups that are high-risk and 
often difficult to reach. The Committee recommends $14,683,000 
for NHTSA's occupant protection efforts which is $3,500,000 
more than the President's budget request. The Committee directs 
that these additional funds be used to continue the outreach 
activities toward minority populations, teens and rural 
populations. To further supplement NHTSA's overall seat belt 
efforts, the Committee has included bill language to continue 
the public service message program that was started in fiscal 
year 2002. A more detailed discussion of this program is 
included in the NHTSA bill language section of this report.
    Impaired driving.--The Committee is very concerned about 
the lack of progress that is being made to reduce the number of 
alcohol-related motor vehicle fatalities. In 2000, there were 
16,653 alcohol-related fatalities which was 5.4 percent more 
than 1999 and represented the largest percentage increase on 
record. These alcohol-related crashes also cause an estimated 
300,000 injuries and cost society over $45,000,000,000 every 
year. Unfortunately, the preliminary estimates for 2001 
indicate there was virtually no reduction in the number of 
alcohol-related fatalities. At the Committee's hearing on 
highway safety on February 27, 2002, witnesses testified that 
the progress in meeting national goals to reduce alcohol-
impaired driving has stalled in recent years. Again, as in the 
case of NHTSA's occupant protection program, the fiscal year 
2003 budget reduced NHTSA's impaired driving core program by 22 
percent at a time when alcohol-related fatalities are 
increasing. The Committee recommends $15,576,000 for NHTSA's 
impaired driving program which is $6,000,000 more than the 
President's budget request.
    Judicial and prosecutorial awareness.--Within the funds 
provided for NHTSA's impaired driving program, the Committee 
provides $1,500,000 to improve prosecutorial and judicial 
actions to combat alcohol-impaired driving. A review of past 
NHTSA expenditures to combat impaired driving revealed that the 
agency has dedicated only a small portion of Section 403 funds 
to support the role of prosecutors and judges in dealing with 
impaired drivers. The Committee directs the Secretary of 
Transportation, in cooperation with the Attorney General, to 
conduct a detailed analysis designed to strengthen Federal 
policies and laws intended to combat alcohol-impaired driving 
and document the results and recommendations. This report 
should identify best strategies for reducing obstacles to 
obtaining convictions of alcohol-impaired driving and 
strategies to help prosecutors and judges apply sanctions in a 
consistent manner. The report should also emphasize strategies 
to reduce plea bargaining, diversion or deferral programs, and 
other means used by offenders to avoid any permanent record of 
an alcohol-related offense. In particular, the analysis should 
provide guidance for improving judicial and prosecutorial 
training, outreach, and adherence to state standards of 
conduct. The Committee directs NHTSA to submit this report to 
the Senate and House Committees on Appropriations by October 1, 
2003.
    Tracking repeat offenders.--The Committee includes 
$3,000,000 within NHTSA's impaired driving program to expedite 
the development and expand the testing of the model ``Driver 
History Information Records System for Impaired Driving.'' This 
tracking system is designed to assist States and local 
communities exchange timely information about prior impaired 
driving offenses and to transmit conviction and license 
suspension notices among law enforcement officials, the courts 
and driver licensing agencies.
    Impaired driving and targeted populations.--The Committee 
is concerned that there continues to be certain segments of the 
population that are over represented in alcohol-related motor 
vehicle crashes. For example, male drivers between the ages of 
21 and 34 represent the highest percentage of alcohol-related 
fatalities. The Committee strongly believes that NHTSA must 
continue to vigorously pursue strategies to reduce impaired 
driving among the age groups and ethnic populations that 
represent the highest risk. Within the funds provided for 
NHTSA's impaired driving program, the Committee includes 
$1,500,000 to increase the outreach efforts with these targeted 
populations.
    Highway safety research.--The Committee includes $7,298,000 
for NHTSA's highway safety research program, an increase of 
$200,000 above the President's budget request. Within the funds 
provided, the Committee includes $200,000 to initiate research 
on advanced alcohol ignition interlock systems. A key component 
of this research is the development of advanced technologies 
for use in the steering wheel that could detect blood alcohol 
levels.
    Drugs, driving and youth.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $1,437,000 for NHTSA's drugs, driving and youth 
program efforts, an increase of $295,000 over the President's 
budget. The Committee is concerned about the data which 
indicates that alcohol and drug use is increasing among 
teenagers. Since this youth population is expected to increase 
nearly 5 percent by the year 2005, the Committee believes it is 
particularly important for NHTSA to boost its impaired driving 
youth prevention and education activities. The Committee is 
aware of programs such as the ``Protecting You, Protecting Me'' 
curriculum which is designed to educate children in grades 1 
through 5 about the dangers of riding in a car with an impaired 
driver and underage alcohol consumption. The Committee directs 
NHTSA to utilize these additional funds to develop a similar 
type of program directed toward teenager drivers.
    Emergency medical services.--The Committee recommends 
$3,189,000 for emergency medical services, which is $1,000,000 
more than the President's budget request. Within the funds 
provided, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to continue 
training EMS personnel in delivering pre-hospital care to 
patients with traumatic brain injuries. Since this program's 
inception in 1998, it is estimated that nearly 31 states will 
have received the training and educational material and over 
1,600 in-state instructors will have received training. The 
Committee urges NHTSA to continue this national rollout with 
the Brain Trauma Foundation and its Centers of Excellence. Just 
as it is important for EMS personnel to receive proper training 
to care for the critically injured, it is equally important 
that first responders have the tools necessary to locate the 
injured as quickly as possible. There have been a number of 
highly publicized cases of crash victims who were stranded for 
extended periods of time because their vehicles were not easily 
located. Advanced location technology associated with wireless 
E 9-1-1 can assist law enforcement and EMS personnel in 
reaching victims quickly. The Committee notes that NHTSA's 
fiscal year 2003 budget includes plans to develop a national 
clearinghouse and best practices document for State 
implementation of wireless E 9-1-1. As these implementation 
tools are developed, the Committee encourages NHTSA to consult 
with a broad range of EMS providers, law enforcement officials, 
wireless technology providers and the appropriate Federal and 
State agencies.
    Motorcycle safety.--The Committee provides $945,000 for 
NHTSA's motorcycle safety efforts which represents a $300,000 
increase over the President's budget. The Committee is 
concerned about the upward trend in the number of motorcycle 
fatalities. From 1999 to 2000, motorcycle fatalities rose by 15 
percent and the preliminary estimates for 2001 indicate that 
fatalities rose by another 7.2 percent over 2000. Since new 
unit sales of on-highway motorcycles have increased in recent 
years, rider training programs have not been able to keep pace. 
In December 2000, NHTSA assembled a technical working group 
comprised of law enforcement, health care, insurance and 
motorcycle organizations to assist in the development of the 
National Agenda for Motorcycle Safety. The Committee has 
provided increased funding to further assist in the 
implementation of the Agenda's urgent and essential 
recommendations. In particular, the Committee urges NHTSA to 
coordinate with the motorcycle community to focus these 
additional resources toward strategies which will enhance rider 
crash avoidance skills and improve motorcycle conspicuity.

                         RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS

    National Automotive Sampling System.--The Committee 
provides $11,570,000 for the National Automotive Sampling 
System (NASS), an increase of $1,000,000 over the President's 
budget request. The NASS General Estimates System data assists 
in assessing the trend and magnitude of the crash situation in 
this country, and the NASS Crashworthiness Data System provides 
more in-depth and descriptive data which allows NHTSA to 
quantify the relationships between the occupants and vehicles 
in the real-world crash environment. The Committee directs 
NHTSA to utilize the additional funds to expand the NASS 
database with a particular focus on child safety seat and tire-
related data.
    Biomechanical research.--The Committee provides a total of 
$14,954,000 for biomechanics research which is $1,000,000 more 
than the President's budget request. The Committee's 
recommendation includes necessary resources for the continued 
research of the Crash Injury Research and Engineering Network 
program. In addition, within the funds provided, the Committee 
includes $2,000,000 to continue research related to traumatic 
brain and spinal cord injuries caused by motor vehicle, 
motorcycle, and bicycle accidents at the Southern Consortium 
for Injury Biomechanics.
    Tire safety research.--The Committee recommendation 
includes $375,000 in NHTSA's pneumatic tire research program 
for the Mercer Engineering Research Center to initiate research 
on the relationships between tire age, condition driven, load 
and pressure and the effects on tire safety.
    Built-in child restraints.--Section 13(h) of the TREAD Act 
required NHTSA to conduct a study on the use and effectiveness 
of automobile booster seats for children. To date, NHTSA has 
yet to release this study which had a statutory deadline of 
November 1st, 2001. The pending study is expected to compare 
the safety benefits of existing booster systems to the safety 
provided to children who are using lap and shoulder belts 
alone. The Committee urges NHTSA to issue the results of the 
booster seat study without delay, however, the Committee 
believes that a review of integrated or built-in child 
restraints is also warranted. The Committee provides $1,000,000 
within NHTSA's safety systems research program to conduct an 
evaluation of integrated or built-in child safety systems. The 
evaluation should include the safety and correctness of fit for 
the child; the availability of testing data on the system and 
vehicle in which it will be used; compatibility with different 
makes and models; cost-effectiveness in mass production for 
consumers; ease of use and relative availability to children 
riding in motor vehicles; and benefits of built-in seats to 
increasing compliance with State child occupant restraint laws. 
The Committee directs NHTSA to submit the results of this 
supplementary study to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by October 1, 2003.
    Heavy vehicle research.--Within the funds provided for 
heavy vehicle research, the Committee includes $1,000,000 for 
the National Transportation Research Center in Tennessee to 
continue to conduct broad-based laboratory-to-roadside research 
into heavy vehicle safety issues.

                        national driver register


                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

    The National Driver Register (NDRS) is a central repository 
of information on individuals whose licenses to operate a motor 
vehicle have been revoked, suspended, canceled, or denied. The 
NDR also contains information on persons who have been 
convicted of serious traffic-related violations such as driving 
while impaired by alcohol or other drugs. State driver 
licensing officials query the NDR when individuals apply for a 
license, for the purpose of determining whether driving 
privileges have been withdrawn by other States. Other 
organizations such as the Federal Aviation Administration and 
the Federal Railroad Administration also use NDR license data 
in hiring and certification decisions in overall U.S. 
transportation operations.
    The bill includes $2,000,000 for the NDR from the highway 
trust fund.
    In addition, the Committee reminds NHTSA that the direction 
given to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 
regarding the implementation of Section 204 of the Motor 
Carrier Safety Improvement Act and the development of a one-
driver, one-record pointer system is equally applicable to 
NHTSA. The Committee expects both agencies to work together on 
these initiatives without further delay.

                     Highway Traffic Safety Grants


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................    $223,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................     225,000,000
Committee recommendation................................     225,000,000

    For fiscal year 2003 the Transportation Equity Act for the 
21st Century authorized the following State grant programs: 
Highway Safety Program, the Alcohol-Impaired Driving 
Countermeasures Incentive Grant Program and the Occupant 
Protection Incentive Grant Program. Under the Highway Safety 
Program, grant allocations are determined on the basis of a 
statutory formula established under 20 U.S.C. 402. Individual 
States use this funding in national priority areas established 
by Congress which have the greatest potential for achieving 
safety improvements and reducing traffic crashes, fatalities, 
and injuries. Also, the national occupant protection survey 
shall be funded from within this amount. The Alcohol-Impaired 
Driving Countermeasures Incentive Grant Program encourages 
States to enact stiffer laws and implement stronger programs to 
detect and remove impaired drivers from the roads. The occupant 
protection program encourages States to promote and strengthen 
occupant protection initiatives. The State Highway Safety Data 
Grants Program encourages States to improve their collection 
and dissemination of important highway safety data.
    The Committee recommends an appropriation for liquidation 
of contract authorization of $225,000,000 for the payment of 
obligations incurred in carrying out provisions of these grant 
programs.
    The Committee has included a provision prohibiting the use 
of section 402 funds for construction, rehabilitation or 
remodeling costs, or for office furnishings and fixtures for 
State, local, or private buildings or structures.

                       limitation on obligations

    The bill includes language limiting the obligations to be 
incurred under the various highway traffic safety grants 
programs. Separate obligation limitations are included in the 
bill with the following funding allocations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                             Fiscal year 2002  Fiscal year 2003     Committee
                                                                  enacted          estimate       recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Highway safety programs....................................     $160,000,000      $165,000,000      $165,000,000
Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grants............       38,000,000        40,000,000        40,000,000
Occupant protection incentive grants.......................       15,000,000        20,000,000        20,000,000
State highway safety data grants...........................       10,000,000   ................  ...............
                                                                                   ...........
                                                            ----------------------------------------------------
      Total................................................      223,000,000       225,000,000       225,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                             BILL LANGUAGE

    Public safety messages.--The bill contains a provision 
(sec. 340) extending the authority for States to use traffic 
safety grant funds under Section 402 to produce and place 
highway safety public service messages in television, radio, 
cinema, print media and on the Internet. This year, the 
Committee continues a provision that was included in the fiscal 
year 2002 bill which designated safety belt use innovative 
grant funds to be used for public safety messages and 
evaluation to support the Operation ABC (America Buckles up 
Children) Mobilizations that are conducted each year in May and 
November. Most of these funds were used to support State high-
visibility ``Click It or Ticket'' enforcement programs in May, 
2002. The preliminary results from the May 2002 initiative show 
continued success in achieving measurable increases in seat 
belt use. The average percentage increase in seat belt use for 
those States utilizing paid advertising in the May mobilization 
initiative was 7.6 percent. Notwithstanding the 
Administration's opposition to this initiative, the Committee 
does commend the NHTSA Administrator for his leadership in this 
program's successful execution.
    The Committee believes that this program must be continued 
and expanded in order to achieve its full potential in saving 
lives and reducing injuries. Just as high visibility 
enforcement programs have proven to be effective in increasing 
seat belt use, research has also concluded that sobriety 
checkpoints are highly effective in reducing alcohol-related 
traffic fatalities and injuries. NHTSA's own survey has 
indicated that 4 out of 5 Americans support increased 
enforcement and tougher laws to protect themselves and their 
families from impaired drivers. The Committee has included bill 
language providing $20,000,000 from seat belt and impaired 
driving grant programs to be used as directed by the NHTSA 
Administrator for broadcast advertising to support national law 
enforcement mobilizations aimed at increasing seat belt use and 
controlling impaired driving. It is the Committee's intent that 
these funds support at least two national mobilizations during 
the year, and that NHTSA work on these initiatives with the 
States and non-profit safety organizations that have been 
active in conducting recent mobilizations. Further, the 
Committee expects NHTSA to work with the States to ensure that 
they have adequate resources for impaired driving enforcement 
activities as part of the mobilizations.

                    FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) became an 
operating administration within the Department of 
Transportation on April 1, 1967. It incorporated the Bureau of 
Railroad Safety from the Interstate Commerce Commission, the 
Office of High Speed Ground Transportation from the Department 
of Commerce, and the Alaska Railroad from the Department of the 
Interior. The Federal Railroad Administration is responsible 
for planning, developing, and administering programs to achieve 
safe operating and mechanical practices in the railroad 
industry. Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation 
(Amtrak) and other financial assistance programs to 
rehabilitate and improve the railroad industry's physical 
infrastructure are also administered by the Federal Railroad 
Administration.
    The Committee recommends $1,422,589,000 for the activities 
of the Federal Railroad Administration for fiscal year 2003. 
This is $711,324,000 more than the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Fiscal year--
                                                           ------------------------------------     Committee
                          Program                                                2003 budget     recommendation
                                                              2002 enacted        estimate
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Safety and operations \1\ \2\ \3\.........................     $110,857,000       $73,264,000      $118,264,000
New user fee revenue for safety and operations............  ................       45,000,000   ................
Railroad research and development.........................       29,000,000        14,325,000        29,325,000
New user fee revenue for railroad research and development  ................       14,000,000   ................
Next generation high-speed rail...........................       32,300,000        23,200,000        30,000,000
Alaska railroad rehabilitation \4\........................       20,000,000   ................       25,000,000
Grants to National Railroad Passenger Corporation \5\.....      826,478,000       521,476,000     1,200,000,000
Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment Project................       20,000,000        20,000,000        20,000,000
Amtrak Reform Council.....................................          225,000   ................  ................
                                                           -----------------------------------------------------
      Total budgetary resources...........................    1,038,633,000       711,265,000     1,422,589,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not include reductions of $175,000 pursuant to section 349 of Public Law 107-87 and $150,000 pursuant
  to section 1106 of Public Law 107-117 for fiscal year 2002.
\2\ Does not include supplemental funding of $6,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117 for emergency expenses to
  respond to the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks on the United States.
\3\ Fiscal year 2003 budget estimate excludes $4,625,000 in CSRS retirement and FEHB accruals.
\4\ Fiscal year 2002 excludes $10,200,000 transferred from USAF.
\5\ Includes $100,000,000 from Public Law 107-117 and $205,000,000 from the 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act
  for further recovery from and response to terrorist Attacks on the United States.

                         Safety and Operations

Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\............................    $110,857,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      73,264,000
Committee recommendation................................     118,264,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $175,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 and $150,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law 
107-117.
\2\ Does not include supplemental funding of $6,000,000 pursuant to 
Public Law 107-117 for emergency expenses to respond to the September 
11, 2001, terrorist attack on the U.S.

    The Safety and Operations account provides support for FRA 
rail safety activities and all other administrative and 
operating activities related to staff and programs.
    Inspector workforce.--The Committee has approved the 
President's request for 10 additional full time equivalent 
(FTE) staff years and 20 additional positions which will bring 
FRA's inspector workforce to a total of 444 FTEs. The Committee 
includes $1,393,000 to fund 6 additional track inspector FTEs 
and 4 additional operating practice inspector FTEs. Given the 
recent increases in track-caused accidents and derailments as 
well as human-factor caused accidents, the Committee urges FRA 
to move rapidly to fill these positions.
    Highway-railroad grade crossing safety.--The Committee 
notes that the Department has either completed or made 
substantial progress on most of the actions specified in its 
strategic action plan to improve safety at highway-railroad 
grade crossings. In view of the need to continue progress in 
this area, the Committee directs the Secretary of 
Transportation to submit with the fiscal year 2004 budget 
request a new action plan outlining specific efforts to be 
pursued by FRA, FHWA, FMCSA, NHTSA and the ITS Joint Program 
Office to improve safety at both public and private crossings.
    Positive train control.--The Committee agrees with the 
National Transportation Safety Board that the current pace of 
development and implementation of collision avoidance 
technologies is inadequate. No plan for industry-wide 
integration has been developed. Progress has been particularly 
slow along rail lines that primarily serve freight carriers, 
and even those lines with significant passenger traffic remain 
largely unprotected today--some 12 years after positive train 
control was first placed on the Safety Board's ``Most Wanted'' 
list. The Committee directs FRA to submit an updated economic 
analysis of the costs and benefits of PTC and related systems 
that takes into account advances in technology, and systems 
savings to carriers and shippers as well as other cost savings 
that might be realized by prioritized deployment of these 
systems, especially along lines that might mix freight and 
passenger trains. That analysis should be submitted as a letter 
report to both the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by October 1, 2003.
    Safety assurance and compliance program (SACP).--In 1997, 
FRA began the implementation of the Safety Assurance and 
Compliance Program (SACP) which is a systems-based approach to 
safety inspection and is designed to help maximize FRA's safety 
inspection efforts. With over 220,000 miles of railroad 
operated by the nation's Class I, regional and local freight 
railroads, the Committee believes it is imperative that FRA 
continue to utilize SACP as well as traditional methods of 
inspection. The Committee directs FRA to provide a status 
report by April 1, 2003 to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations which summarizes FRA's SACP activities in fiscal 
year 2002 along with the agency's safety audit plans for fiscal 
year 2003.

                    SAFETY AND OPERATIONS USER FEES

Appropriations, 2002....................................................
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   ($45,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................................

    User fees.--The Committee denies the Administration's 
legislative proposal to impose safety user fees on FRA safety 
and operations services.

                   Railroad Research and Development

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $29,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      14,325,000
Committee recommendation................................      29,325,000

    The Federal Railroad Administration's Railroad Research and 
Development Program provides for research in the development of 
safety and performance standards for high-speed rail and the 
evaluation of their role in the Nation's transportation 
infrastructure. The Committee recommends an appropriation of 
$29,325,000 for railroad research and development, $15,000,000 
more than the administration's requested level.

                        committee recommendation

    The Committee recommends the following funding levels for 
the Railroad research and development programs:

Railroad System Issues..................................      $3,225,000
Human Factors...........................................       3,478,000
Rolling Stock and Components............................       2,487,000
Track and Structures....................................       5,225,000
Track and Train Interaction.............................       3,350,000
Train Control...........................................       1,250,000
Grade Crossings.........................................       1,435,000
Hazardous Materials Transportation......................       1,000,000
Train Occupant Protection...............................       6,450,000
R&D Facilities and Test Equipment.......................       1,425,000

    Track and Structures.--The Committee provides $5,225,000 
for FRA's track and structures research efforts. Within the 
funds provided, the Committee includes $1,000,000 to continue 
the development of the Integrated Railway Remote Information 
Service (InteRRIS) which is public-private demonstration 
program which utilizes defect detectors across North America. 
InteRRIS is an internet-based system designed to aggregate, 
interrogate and store data from these field-deployed detector 
systems. These additional funds will provide enhancements to 
FRA's National Rail Corridor Car Performance Database to make 
it web accessible and generate new queries to support any 
analysis of the data for improving safety and predictive 
maintenance. The Committee also includes $2,000,000 for 
Marshall University and the University of Nebraska's 
development and testing of a track stability data processing 
and feedback system for track safety.
    Freight congestion study.--The Committee is aware of 
continued railroad-freight congestion issues in the Chicago, 
Illinois region. It can take 2 days or more to move freight 
through the region, often times at train speeds averaging 
between 6.8 and 12 m.p.h. Blocked crossings also contribute to 
this congestion. More than 37,500 rail freight cars move 
through the region daily across nearly 2,000 at-grade railroad 
crossings and to 26 intermodal yards. The Committee directs the 
Federal Railroad Administrator to work with the Chicago 
Transportation Coordination Office and communities in the 
Chicago region, including the city of Chicago, to compile and 
publish a periodic measure of the impact of rail operations in 
the area. This shall also include the status of improvement 
projects undertaken by the railroads to relieve congestion. 
This information should translate operational reports to 
reflect community impacts of blocked crossings and idling 
locomotives/trains. These reports shall be submitted on a 
quarterly basis. The administrator should also expand the 
number of monitored crossings in the Chicago region to measure 
the full extent of block railroad crossings, including using 
event recorders and/or remote monitors to collect data 
indicating the exact times grade crossing gates are closed and 
the length of time they remain closed. The administrator should 
report to the House and Senate Committees on Appropriations the 
status of these efforts no later than 120 days after enactment.

              RAILROAD RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT USER FEES

Appropriations, 2002....................................................
Budget estimate, 2003...................................   ($14,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................................

    User fees.--The Committee denies the Administration's 
legislative proposal to impose user fees on FRA's railroad 
research and development activities.

       Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program

    Section 502 of Public Law 94-210, as amended authorizes 
obligation guarantees for meeting the long-term capital needs 
of private railroads. Railroads utilize this funding mechanism 
to finance major new facilities and rehabilitation or 
consolidation of current facilities. No appropriations or new 
loan guarantee commitments are proposed in fiscal year 2003.
    The Rail Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing Program, 
as established in section 7203 of the Transportation Equity Act 
for the 21st Century [TEA21], will enable the Secretary of 
Transportation to provide loans and loan guarantees to State 
and local governments, Government-sponsored authorities and 
corporations, railroads and joint ventures to acquire, improve, 
or rehabilitate intermodal or rail equipment or facilities, 
including track, bridges, yards, and shops.

                    Next Generation High-Speed Rail

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $32,200,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      23,200,000
Committee recommendation................................      30,000,000

    The Committee has provided $30,000,000 in general fund 
appropriations for the High-Speed Ground Transportation [HSGT] 
Program, $6,800,000 more than the President's budget request.
    The Committee first provided funding for the Next 
Generation High-Speed Rail [NGHSR] Program in fiscal year 1995. 
The program funds high-speed rail research, development, and 
technology programs that are aimed at demonstrations to foster 
high-speed passenger service on rail corridors throughout the 
country.
    The Committee recommends the following funding levels for 
the Next Generation High-Speed Rail Programs:

High-speed train control systems........................      $5,000,000
High-speed non-electric locomotives.....................       5,300,000
Grade crossing hazard mitigation/Low-cost innovative 
    technologies........................................       3,900,000
Track and structures technology.........................       1,200,000
Corridor planning.......................................       9,100,000
Magnetic levitation.....................................       5,500,000

    High-speed train control systems.--The Committee has 
provided a total of $5,000,000 for the North American Joint PTC 
project.
    Grade crossing hazard mitigation/low-cost innovative 
technologies.--The Committee recommends $3,900,000 for grade 
crossing hazard mitigation and low-cost innovative technology 
initiatives.
    Within the funds provided, the Committee includes the 
following allocations:

North Carolina Sealed Corridor Initiative...............        $700,000
Illinois Rail-Grade crossing safety program.............         800,000
State of Vermont hazard elimination.....................         500,000

    Corridor planning.--The Committee includes $9,100,000 for 
passenger rail corridor planning. Within the funds provided, 
the Committee includes the following allocations:

Southeast High Speed Rail Corridor, NC..................      $1,000,000
California high-speed rail..............................       2,000,000
Florida high-speed rail.................................       3,850,000
Gulf Coast high-speed rail corridor.....................         800,000
Seattle-Everett corridor study..........................         750,000
Las Vegas-Los Angeles high-speed study..................         200,000
Northern New England corridor, VT.......................         500,000

    Seattle-Everett, Washington Rail Corridor Study.--The 
Committee provides $750,000 to conduct a corridor planning 
study of track capacity and utilization by freight, commuter 
and intercity rail services in the Seattle-Everett portion of 
the Pacific Northwest High Speed Rail Corridor and the 
environmental challenges that would accompany expansion of that 
track capacity.
    Las Vegas-Los Angeles study.--The Committee provides 
$200,000 to conduct a rail capacity and ridership analysis for 
high-speed rail service between Las Vegas and Los Angeles. The 
study will assess existing capacity along the route; identify 
potential improvements to increase capacity and reduce trip 
times; conduct preliminary engineering and assess station 
requirements.
    Magnetic levitation transportation.--A total of $5,500,000 
has been provided for magnetic levitation activities to be 
distributed as follows:

Washington-Baltimore, MD: Environmental studies.........        $500,000
Nevada-California: Environmental impact studies, design 
    and engineering.....................................       2,000,000
Greensburgh-Pittsburgh, PA: Environmental impact study..       2,000,000
Southern California Maglev environmental study and 
    planning............................................       1,000,000

    Rail-highway crossing hazard eliminations.--Section 1103 of 
the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA21) 
provides $5,250,000 for the elimination of rail-highway 
crossing hazards. Of these set-aside funds, the following 
allocations are made:

Gulf Coast high-speed rail corridor.....................      $2,000,000
Chicago Hub high-speed rail corridor between Milwaukee 
    and LaCrosse, WI....................................         500,000
Pacific Northwest high-speed rail corridor..............       1,500,000

                     Alaska Railroad Rehabilitation

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................................
Committee recommendation................................      25,000,000

\1\ Excludes $10,200,000 transferred from USAF pursuant to section 8062 
of Public Law 107-117.

    The Committee has included a total of $25,000,000 for rail 
safety and infrastructure improvements benefiting passenger 
operations of the Alaska railroad. This railroad extends 498 
miles from Seward through Anchorage, the largest city in 
Alaska, to the city of Fairbanks, and east to the town of North 
Pole and Eielson Air Force Base. It carries both passengers and 
freight, and provides a critical transportation link for 
passengers and cargo traveling through difficult terrain and 
harsh climatic conditions.

     Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation (Amtrak)

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................    $831,476,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................     521,476,000
Committee recommendation................................   1,200,000,000

\1\ Includes supplemental funding of $105,000,000 pursuant to Public Law 
107-117 and $205,000,000 pursuant to the Supplemental Appropriations Act 
for Fiscal Year 2002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    For fiscal year 2003, the administration has requested an 
appropriation of $521,476,000. The amount requested by the 
administration is $310,000,000 or 37 percent less than the 
amount appropriated to Amtrak for fiscal year 2002. Separately, 
Amtrak's Board of Directors has submitted a budget request for 
$1,200,000,000 for fiscal year 2003, an increase of 
$368,524,000 or 44 percent more than the fiscal year 2002 
comparable level.
    In two separate hearings before the Committee, both 
Amtrak's current and former Chief Executive Officer testified 
that receiving a Federal appropriation at the level sought by 
the administration for fiscal year 2003 will cause the railroad 
to go bankrupt and terminate all rail service at the beginning 
of the year. When invited to do so, both the Deputy Secretary 
of Transportation and the Federal Railroad Administrator 
declined to refute the observations of Amtrak's senior managers 
on that question.
    Status of authorizing legislation.--The Amtrak Reform and 
Accountability Act of 1997 (ARAA), Public Law 105-134, 
authorized annual appropriations totaling $5,200,000,000 over a 
5 year period ending in fiscal year 2002. Amtrak received 
approximately $2,230,000,000 of the $5,200,000,000 authorized 
during that period.
    Amtrak remains unauthorized for fiscal year 2003. However, 
both the House authorizing subcommittee and the Senate 
authorizing committee have reported reauthorization legislation 
during this congressional session. The Senate committee's 
reauthorization bill, which was ordered reported by the 
Commerce Committee by a vote of 20 to 3, is currently pending 
on the Senate calendar. For Amtrak, that bill authorizes a 
total of $14,991,000,000 over 5 years including an 
authorization of $3,930,000,000 for fiscal year 2003.
    Shortly after the time when the Secretary of Transportation 
joined the Amtrak Board of Directors, he publicly called on the 
Congress to move out quickly and enact legislation 
reauthorizing Amtrak. Now, some 13 months later, the Secretary 
has yet to submit his own legislative proposal for Amtrak's 
reauthorization. While the Secretary did make a speech on the 
morning of June 20, 2002 outlining the ``principals'' governing 
the administration's Amtrak policy, the only formal legislative 
proposal submitted to Congress this year has been a proposal 
for Amtrak to borrow an additional $170,000,000 against the 
railroad's 2003 appropriation so that the company could 
continue to operate through the remainder of fiscal year 2002. 
The Congress rejected this proposal, choosing instead to 
provide a supplemental appropriation of $205,000,000 to ensure 
the continuation of Amtrak service without any further 
borrowing against its fiscal year 2003 appropriation.
    Transparency in Amtrak's Budget Process.--The Secretary and 
other members of the administration have stated repeatedly that 
greater transparency is needed in Amtrak's budgeting process. 
The Committee wholeheartedly agrees and commends the Secretary 
for his successful efforts in requiring Amtrak to provide all 
relevant participants in the debate with accurate and timely 
financial documentation. Similarly, the Committee commends 
Amtrak's new leadership for its willingness to provide such 
transparency in the development of the railroad's spending 
plans.
    In the interest of providing transparency to the 
appropriations process for Amtrak, the Committee recommendation 
provides with specificity the precise amounts appropriated for 
Amtrak's operating losses, its capital expenses on the 
Northeast Corridor Mainline and its capital expenses over the 
rest of the Amtrak system. In recent years, the Committee 
provided Amtrak's appropriation as a grant for capital expenses 
only. This practice served to obfuscate the true amount of 
Federal funding that was needed to cover Amtrak's operating 
losses. For fiscal year 2003, the Committee provides 
$550,000,000 for Amtrak's operating expenses including 
$160,000,000 for Amtrak's mandated payments to the Railroad 
Retirement system. The Committee also provides $369,000,000 for 
capital expenses over Amtrak's Northeast Corridor Mainline and 
$281,000,000 for capital expenses over Amtrak's national route 
system excluding the Northeast Corridor Mainline.

Allocation of Committee Recommended Fiscal Year 2003 Appropriation

Operating expenses:
    Excess RRTA.........................................   $160,000,000 
    Operating loss......................................    465,000,000 
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Operating...............................    625,000,000 
    Required Savings....................................    (75,000,000)
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, operating expenses with required savings    550,000,000 
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Capital Expenses:
    NEC Mainline........................................    464,000,000 
    Required Savings--NEC Mainline......................    (95,000,000)
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, NEC Mainline............................    369,000,000 
    Other Corridors/Long-Distance.......................    355,000,000 
    Required Savings--Other Corridors/Long Distance.....    (74,000,000)
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Subtotal, Other Corridors/Long Distance...........    281,000,000 
      Subtotal, Capital Expenses........................    650,000,000 
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
      Fiscal year 2003 Appropriation....................  1,200,000,000 

    Requirement for operational savings and capital expense 
reductions.--Based on Amtrak's current revenue and expense 
projections, Amtrak could justify an overall Federal subsidy 
requirement of $1,444,000,000 for fiscal year 2003. As 
displayed above, with an appropriation of $1,200,000,000, 
Amtrak's new management will be required to come up with 
expense reductions to decrease its anticipated operating loss 
by $75,000,000 in fiscal year 2003. In addition, capital 
expense reductions of $95,000,000 will be required on the 
Northeast Corridor and capital expense reductions of 
$74,000,000 will be required across Amtrak's national system 
excluding the Northeast Corridor in order to bring capital 
spending in line with the recommended appropriation. Amtrak's 
new management has signaled its determination to achieve these 
savings while continuing to operate Amtrak's entire national 
network.
    Contributors to Amtrak's near term financial crises.--There 
are a great many factors that have contributed to Amtrak's near 
term financial crises. One that is particularly pertinent to 
the requirement for an increased appropriation for fiscal year 
2003 is the uneven pattern of Federal support that Amtrak has 
experienced over the last several years. The Taxpayer Relief 
Act, which was signed into law on August 5, 1997, included tax 
carry-back provisions that effectively made Amtrak eligible for 
a tax return totaling $2,323,000,000. That Federal funding 
allowed Amtrak to make dramatically increased capital 
expenditures, especially in the Northeast Corridor. It also 
served as a source of funding from which Amtrak borrowed from 
time to time to cover operating shortfalls. This one-time 
infusion of funding through tax legislation prompted Amtrak to 
embark on a spending pattern that would be unsustainable over 
the long term. The railroad has now reached the point where 
effectively all of the funding provided through the Taxpayer 
Relief Act has been spent and is, therefore, no longer 
available to cover core elements of Amtrak's cost structure.
    Complicating this problem further was a change made in the 
timing in which annually appropriated funding was made 
available to Amtrak. The present administration's budget 
request for fiscal year 2002 abandoned the convention whereby 
Amtrak did not get its annual appropriation until the very end 
of the fiscal year. The Congress acquiesced to this request in 
the Transportation Appropriations Act for that year. As a 
result, Amtrak, in fiscal year 2002, simultaneously had access 
to most of its 2001 appropriation which carried over into 2002 
as well as all of its 2002 appropriation. As such, heading into 
fiscal year 2003, approval of the administration's proposed 
freeze on Amtrak spending at the 2002 level would actually 
represent a dramatic cut in available Federal resources to 
Amtrak. The table below displays the annual appropriation for 
each fiscal year opposite the actual amount of Federal funding 
spent by Amtrak in each year from all Federal sources including 
the Taxpayer Relief Act.

                      CASH CONSUMPTION FROM ALL FEDERAL SOURCES VERSUS ANNUAL APPROPRIATION
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                     Committee
                                       1997      1998      1999      2000      2001    Projected  recommendation
                                                                                          2002         2003
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Federal Spending--Operating........     406.1     344.0     484.0     362.0     242.0      445.0         550.0
Federal Spending--Capital..........     600.0   1,220.4     597.1     971.9     331.1      673.6         650.0
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Federal Spending--Total......   1,006.1   1,564.4   1,081.1   1,333.9     573.1    1,118.0       1,200.0
                                    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Annual Appropriation...............     842.5     594.0     609.2     571.0     521.0      831.0       1,200.0
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Amtrak's debt burden.--Adding to Amtrak's financial 
difficulties has been the increasingly punishing debt burden 
that the railroad has taken on in just the last few years. The 
requirement to recapitalize its resources has prompted the 
railroad to finance an increasing amount of its capital 
improvements using a variety of debt instruments. Moreover, 
Amtrak's false belief that launching the new Acela service 
would greatly benefit the company's bottom line prompted the 
company to finance major elements of that project so as to 
implement high-speed rail service as soon as possible. Finally, 
Amtrak's periodic cash emergencies have prompted the 
corporation to engage in a number of short-term financial 
transactions to free up cash that added to the company's debt 
burden, but kept the company out of bankruptcy. These 
transactions, which in many instances required the Secretary's 
approval, included the mortgaging of portions of Pennsylvania 
Station in New York City. The table below displays the history 
of Amtrak's debt burden over the last 5 years. 


                     Source: DOT Inspector General.

    Amtrak's annual debt service payments are expected to reach 
$175,000,000 in fiscal year 2003--an increase of more than 150 
percent from the level just 5 years earlier. Amtrak's growing 
debt burden was the principal reason why the Committee rejected 
the administration's proposed legislation to saddle the company 
with still more debt to stay solvent through fiscal year 2002. 
The Committee instead provided a cash grant sufficient to cover 
Amtrak's remaining operating shortfall for the year. Given the 
size of Amtrak's debt burden, the Committee is puzzled by the 
administration's stated proposal to spin off some parts of 
Amtrak's operations to private vendors. The Committee hopes 
that any future administration testimony on behalf of this 
proposal will include a cogent explanation as to who will 
assume the company's debts when portions of the company are 
``spun off'' or ``privatized.''
    Viability of Amtrak routes.--Much of the debate surrounding 
the appropriate Federal role in subsidizing Amtrak has centered 
around the viability of Amtrak's existing route structure. On 
March 7, 2002, the Committee held a hearing with the Deputy 
Secretary of Transportation, the then-President of Amtrak and 
the DOT Inspector General. As part of that hearing, Inspector 
General Kenneth M. Mead made the following observation:

          Some have suggested that Amtrak's financial woes 
        would go away if you would cut out the trains outside 
        the Northeast Corridor. That is not true. In fact, the 
        annual net operating subsidy that is required to 
        continue Amtrak's most unprofitable trains is less than 
        one-third of the annual capital subsidy that is 
        required to operate the most profitable trains in the 
        Northeast Corridor.

    A review of Amtrak's own financial data indicates that the 
Inspector General is entirely correct except for his 
representation that certain Northeast Corridor trains are 
``profitable.'' As demonstrated below, whether evaluated on a 
profit and loss (P&L) basis using GAAP accounting or just on a 
net contribution basis excluding depreciation, Northeast 
Corridor service is not expected to come close to making a 
profit in 2003 just as it hasn't made a profit in any previous 
year.

Northeast Corridor Contribution Analysis

                                                        Fiscal year 2003
Profit and loss basis:
    Total Revenue.......................................   $845,000,000 
    Total Expense (excl. Depreciation)..................    843,000,000 
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Net Operating Contribution before Depreciation....      2,000,000 
    Depreciation........................................   (330,000,000)
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Net loss..........................................   (328,000,000)
                    ========================================================
                    ____________________________________________________
Contribution (Non P&L Basis)
    Operating Contribution..............................      2,000,000 
    Capital Funding Required............................   (369,000,000)
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Net Contribution Requirement......................   (367,000,000)

    As the Secretary has stated on a number of occasions, the 
Northeast Corridor has a critical maintenance backlog of 
between $5,000,000,000 and $6,000,000,000. While there is a 
mounting backlog of maintenance needs across the rest of the 
Amtrak system, these needs do not begin to approach even a 
fifth of the needs along the Northeast Corridor. As such, the 
Committee does not believe that Amtrak's Northeast Corridor 
service is any more ``financially viable'' than the rest of the 
Amtrak network, given both the short term and long term capital 
needs of that Corridor.
    Proposals to shrink Amtrak into financial health ignore the 
comparatively small burden that Amtrak's long distance trains 
place on the company's budget. Amtrak has performed a financial 
analysis of the savings associated with eliminating 18 of its 
long distance trains. Within the first year, such a policy, 
which would eliminate Amtrak service in 24 States, would yield 
effectively zero savings in the first year. In the second year, 
savings in Amtrak's operating budget would approach only 
$18,000,000. Only after 5 years would the elimination of these 
services yield annual operating savings exceeding 
$200,000,000--an amount that will not even cover Amtrak's 
anticipated debt service payments for that year. And such 
savings does not represent even 5 percent of the identified 
capital backlog in the Northeast Corridor. This analysis 
prompts the Committee to reject the notion that Amtrak can 
shrink its way to financial health.
    Administration's proposed reforms.--As stated earlier, 
despite the fact that Amtrak's authorization will expire in 
just a few weeks time, the administration has yet to submit a 
reauthorization proposal embodying the ``reforms'' that the 
Secretary discussed in his speech of June 20, 2002. Even so, 
the Committee has some concerns regarding his proposals in the 
face of his budget request for 2003.
    The administration has stated its belief that the States 
should be required to shoulder a larger portion of the costs of 
Amtrak service. The Committee is well aware that there are 
currently gross inequities between the States when it comes to 
State subsidization of Amtrak service. While the Committee 
believes that initiatives to eliminate these inequities have 
merit, the Committee does not believe that States are in a 
position to absorb the cost of Amtrak service overnight. 
Unfortunately, should the administration's budget request for 
Amtrak be enacted, such an immediate assumption of Amtrak's 
costs, if it could even be executed, would be the only way that 
the railroad might avoid almost immediate bankruptcy.
    Recently, the National Governors Association reported that 
the States are wrestling with eliminating anticipated State 
deficits that could exceed $40,000,000,000 in the coming fiscal 
year. Their financial predicament has not been helped any by 
the administration's proposal to reduce Federal highway funding 
to the States by $8,600,000,000 in that year. The Committee 
believes that a more fruitful dialogue over the appropriate 
role for States in financing Amtrak service could take place if 
the administration were to submit a realistic budget request 
that would allow those States that are able to increase their 
contribution incrementally and over time. Such a dialogue 
should also recognize that certain States enjoy far better 
Amtrak service than others and that all States contribute 
toward the Federal subsidy to Amtrak and, thus, are deserving 
of some level of intercity rail passenger service. Certain 
States that face particularly difficult financial conditions 
may never be able to increase their contribution.

                         AMTRAK REFORM COUNCIL

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................        $225,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................................
Committee recommendation................................................

\1\ The Council is an independent entity. Its funding is presented 
within the FRA for display purposes only.

    The Committee has not provided funding for the Amtrak 
Reform Council as the Council has now issued its final report 
and completed its work.

               PENNSYLVANIA STATION REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $20,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      20,000,000
Committee recommendation................................      20,000,000


    In 2000, an advance appropriation of $20,000,000 was 
provided for each fiscal year 2001, 2002, and 2003. These funds 
support the redevelopment of the Pennsylvania Station in New 
York City, including the renovation of the James A. Farley Post 
Office building as a train station and commercial center, and 
basic upgrades to Pennsylvania Station.

                     FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION


                  Summary of Fiscal Year 2003 Program

    The Federal Transit Administration was established as a 
component of the Department of Transportation by Reorganization 
Plan No. 2 of 1968, effective July 1, 1968, which transferred 
most of the functions and programs under the Federal Transit 
Act of 1964, as amended (78 Stat. 302; 49 U.S.C. 1601 et seq.), 
from the Department of Housing and Urban Development. The 
missions of the Federal Transit Administration are: to assist 
in the development of improved mass transportation facilities, 
equipment, techniques, and methods; to encourage the planning 
and establishment of urban and rural transportation services 
needed for economical and desirable development; to provide 
mobility for transit dependents in both metropolitan and rural 
areas; to maximize productivity of transportation systems; and 
to provide assistance to State and local governments and their 
instrumentalities in financing such services and systems.
    The current authorization for the programs funded by the 
Federal Transit Administration is contained in the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century.
    Under the Committee recommendation, a total program level 
of $7,326,000,000 would be provided for the programs of the 
Federal Transit Administration for fiscal year 2003, which is 
$100,000,000 more than the obligation limitation authorized 
under the mass transit category in TEA21. This funding is 
comprised of $1,545,000,000 in direct appropriations of general 
funds and $5,781,000,000 in limitations on contract authority.
    The following table summarizes the Committee's 
recommendations compared to fiscal year 2002 and the 
administration's request:

                                            [In thousands of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                   Committee
                        Program                             2002 enacted    2003 estimate \1\    recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrative expenses................................             67,000             73,000             73,000
Formula grants \2\ \3\.................................          3,542,000          3,839,000          3,839,000
University transportation research.....................              6,000              6,000              6,000
Transit planning and research..........................            116,000            122,000            122,000
Capital investment grants \3\ \4\......................          2,891,000          3,036,000          3,136,000
Job access and reverse commute grants..................            125,000            150,000            150,000
                                                        --------------------------------------------------------
      Total............................................          6,747,000          7,226,000          7,326,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes $3,586,000 in CSRS/FEHB accruals.
\2\ Excludes $23,500,000 in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\3\ Fiscal year 2002 reflects transfer of $50,000,000 from Formula grants to Capital investment grants.
\4\ Excludes $100,000,000 in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

                        Administrative Expenses


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              General fund        Trust fund
                                                                                                       Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002....................................       $13,400,000        $53,600,000       $67,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \1\...............................        14,600,000         58,400,000        73,000,000
Committee recommendation................................        14,600,000         58,400,000        73,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Excludes $3,586,000 in CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    The Committee recommends a total of $73,000,000 in budget 
resources funds for administrative expenses.

                             Formula Grants


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              General fund       Trust fund            Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\..............................      $668,400,000    $2,873,600,000    $3,542,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003.....................................       767,800,000     3,071,200,000     3,839,000,000
Committee recommendation..................................       767,800,000     3,071,200,000     3,839,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects $50,000,000 transferred to capital investment grants pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and excludes
  $23,500,000 in Emergency Supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Fiscal year 2002 does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to FTA.

    Formula grants to States and local agencies funded under 
this heading fall into four categories: urbanized area formula 
grants (U.S.C. sec. 5307); clean fuels formula grants (U.S.C. 
sec. 5308); formula grants and loans for special needs of 
elderly individuals and individuals with disabilities (U.S.C. 
sec. 5310); and formula grants for non-urbanized areas (U.S.C. 
sec. 5311). In addition, setasides of formula funds are 
directed to: a grant program for intercity bus operators to 
finance Americans with Disabilities Act [ADA] accessibility 
costs; and the Alaska Railroad for improvements to its 
passenger operations.
    Within the total funding level of $3,839,000,000 for fiscal 
year 2003, the statutory distribution of these formula grants 
is allocated among these categories as follows:

Urbanized areas (sec. 5307).............................  $3,445,939,606
Clean fuels (sec. 5308).................................      50,000,000
Elderly and disabled (sec. 5310)........................      90,652,801
Nonurbanized areas (sec. 5311)..........................     240,607,643
Over-the-Road Bus Program...............................       6,950,000
Alaska railroad.........................................       4,849,950

    Section 3007 of TEA21 amends U.S.C. 5307, urbanized formula 
grants, by striking the authorization to utilize these funds 
for operating costs, but includes a specific provision allowing 
the Secretary to make operating grants to urbanized areas with 
a population of less than 200,000. Generally, urbanized formula 
grants may be used to fund capital projects, and to finance 
planning and improvement costs of equipment, facilities, and 
associated capital maintenance used in mass transportation. All 
urbanized areas greater than 200,000 in population are 
statutorily required to use 1 percent of their annual formula 
grants on enhancements, which include landscaping, public art, 
bicycle storage, and connections to parks.
    Clean fuels program.--The Transportation Equity Act for the 
21st Century requires that $50,000,000 be set-aside from funds 
made available under the formula grants program to fund the 
clean fuels program. The clean fuels program is supplemented by 
an additional set-aside from the major capital investment's bus 
program and provides grants for the purchase or lease of clean 
fuel buses for eligible recipients in areas that are not in 
compliance with air quality attainment standards. The Committee 
has included bill language transferring the clean fuel formula 
set-aside funds to the capital investment grants account. The 
Committee has identified designated recipients of these funds 
within the projects listed under the bus program of the capital 
investment grants account.
    The following table displays the State-by-State 
distribution of the formula program funds within each of the 
program categories:

 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, FISCAL YEAR 2003 GUARANTEED LEVEL APPORTIONMENT FOR FORMULA PROGRAMS (BY STATE)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                  Section 5310
                                                  Section 5307    Section 5311     elderly and    Total formula
                     State                       urbanized area   nonurbanized    persons with       programs
                                                                      area        disabilities
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alabama........................................     $14,927,927      $6,693,617      $1,582,925      $23,204,469
Alaska.........................................   \1\ 8,546,214         932,932         240,303        9,719,449
American Samoa.................................  ..............         153,033          60,088          213,121
Arizona........................................      44,214,267       3,265,400       1,652,847       49,132,514
Arkansas.......................................       8,076,720       4,841,871       1,029,871       13,948,462
California.....................................     583,841,997      10,475,294       9,488,919      603,806,210
Colorado.......................................      46,448,166       2,907,313       1,160,010       50,515,489
Connecticut....................................      46,629,133       1,488,013       1,128,644       49,245,790
Delaware.......................................       6,342,133         674,647         352,994        7,369,774
District of Columbia...........................      66,802,132  ..............         309,042       67,111,174
Florida........................................     158,320,783       6,710,664       6,064,881      171,096,328
Georgia........................................      63,237,705       8,484,475       2,295,637       74,017,817
Guam...........................................       1,359,878          60,272         157,227        1,577,377
Hawaii.........................................      26,885,021       1,003,351         476,147       28,364,519
Idaho..........................................       5,731,779       1,843,482         455,768        8,031,029
Illinois.......................................     220,316,888       7,163,547       3,526,256      231,006,691
Indiana........................................      36,011,838       7,130,780       1,871,517       45,014,135
Iowa...........................................      12,875,848       4,838,882         980,862       18,695,592
Kansas.........................................       9,613,682       3,954,869         882,653       14,451,204
Kentucky.......................................      19,550,450       6,611,124       1,461,839       27,623,413
Louisiana......................................      31,467,926       5,164,303       1,455,553       38,087,782
Maine..........................................       3,062,068       2,566,899         533,084        6,162,051
Maryland.......................................      69,014,462       2,800,694       1,545,478       73,360,634
Massachusetts..................................     127,232,927       1,907,117       2,041,414      131,181,458
Michigan.......................................      68,303,580       8,975,050       2,938,848       80,217,478
Minnesota......................................      42,155,128       5,897,179       1,366,007       49,418,314
Mississippi....................................       5,276,443       5,782,322       1,032,720       12,091,485
Missouri.......................................      36,804,592       6,690,078       1,788,808       45,283,478
Montana........................................       2,581,607       1,784,329         384,485        4,750,421
N. Mariana Islands.............................         676,035          20,103          60,998          757,136
Nebraska.......................................       8,374,720       2,420,469         596,510       11,391,699
Nevada.........................................      24,300,864         859,972         721,940       25,882,776
New Hampshire..................................       4,650,337       1,826,955         457,852        6,935,144
New Jersey.....................................     216,873,343       1,764,450       2,587,773      221,225,566
New Mexico.....................................       9,107,633       2,555,496         655,206       12,318,335
New York.......................................     548,839,731       9,273,805       6,091,120      564,204,656
North Carolina.................................      37,223,366      11,455,078       2,563,722       51,242,166
North Dakota...................................       3,056,087       1,098,920         310,725        4,465,732
Ohio...........................................      91,723,614      10,796,386       3,431,195      105,951,195
Oklahoma.......................................      13,978,521       5,254,198       1,208,398       20,441,117
Oregon.........................................      36,021,230       3,860,548       1,122,512       41,004,290
Pennsylvania...................................     155,123,266      10,871,771       4,044,433      170,039,470
Puerto Rico....................................      44,710,018         886,606       1,399,708       46,996,332
Rhode Island...................................       8,295,427         321,072         463,004        9,079,503
South Carolina.................................      14,169,630       5,711,432       1,383,261       21,264,323
South Dakota...................................       2,348,155       1,496,539         339,305        4,183,999
Tennessee......................................      28,761,361       7,277,715       1,914,830       37,953,906
Texas..........................................     194,268,566      16,176,384       5,644,548      216,089,498
Utah...........................................      27,314,937       1,295,746         592,321       29,203,004
Vermont........................................       1,043,904       1,344,823         294,426        2,683,153
Virgin Islands.................................  ..............         290,119         150,772          440,891
Virginia.......................................      54,257,001       6,317,842       2,017,699       62,592,542
Washington.....................................      95,180,075       4,247,980       1,720,930      101,148,985
West Virginia..................................       4,929,603       3,461,591         784,330        9,175,524
Wisconsin......................................      41,295,126       6,734,456       1,574,405       49,603,987
Wyoming........................................       1,381,764         982,612         256,054        2,620,430
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal.................................   3,433,535,608     239,404,605      90,652,801    3,763,593,014
Oversight......................................      17,253,948       1,203,038  ..............       18,456,986
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
Total..........................................   3,450,789,556     240,607,643      90,652,801    3,782,050,000
                                                ================================================================
Clean Fuels....................................  ..............  ..............  ..............       50,000,000
Over-the-Road Bus Accessibility................  ..............  ..............  ..............        6,950,000
                                                ----------------------------------------------------------------
      Grand Total..............................  ..............  ..............  ..............    3,839,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $4,849,950 for the Alaska Railroad improvements to passenger operations.

    Over-the-road buses.--The Committee has included $6,950,000 
in fiscal year 2003 for the over-the-road accessibility 
program. These funds are intended to assist over-the-road bus 
operators in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act 
accessibility requirements.

                   University Transportation Research


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   General fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............................................      $1,200,000      $4,800,000      $6,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................       1,200,000       4,800,000       6,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................       1,200,000       4,800,000       6,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Section 5505 of TEA21 provides authorization for the 
university transportation research program. The purpose of the 
university transportation research program is to become a 
national resource and focal point for the support and conduct 
of research and training concerning the transportation of 
passengers and property. Funds provided under the FTA 
university transportation research program are transferred to 
and managed by the Research and Special Programs Administration 
(RSPA), combined with a transfer from the Federal Highway 
Administration of $26,500,000.
    The Committee action provides $6,000,000 for the university 
transportation research program, the same level as provided in 
fiscal year 2002.

                     Transit Planning and Research


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   General fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\........................................     $23,000,000     $93,000,000    $116,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................      24,200,000      97,800,000     122,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      24,200,000      97,800,000     122,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to FTA.

    The Committee action provides $122,000,000 for transit 
planning and research. The bill contains language specifying 
that $60,385,600 shall be available for the metropolitan 
planning program; $5,250,000 for the rural transit assistance 
program; $31,500,000 for the national planning and research 
program; $12,614,400 for the State planning and research 
program; $8,250,000 for transit cooperative research; and 
$4,000,000 for the National Transit Institute at Rutgers 
University.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendation:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                     Fiscal year--
                             ----------------------------    Committee
                              2002 program   2003 budget  recommendation
                                level \1\     estimate
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Metropolitan planning.......   $55,422,400   $60,385,600    $60,385,600
Rural transit assistance         5,250,000     5,250,000      5,250,000
 program....................
State planning and research     11,577,600    12,614,400     12,614,400
 program....................
Transit cooperative research     8,250,000     8,250,000      8,250,000
 program....................
National Transit Institute..     4,000,000     4,000,000      4,000,000
National planning and           31,500,000    31,500,000     31,500,000
 research program...........
                             -------------------------------------------
      Total.................   116,000,000   122,000,000    122,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Fiscal year 2002 does not reflect FHWA flex funding transferred to
  FTA.

                 NATIONAL PLANNING AND RESEARCH PROGRAM

    The Committee recommendation includes transit planning and 
research grants from the national program for:

        Project                                                   Amount
Auburn University Compus Transit System, AL.............        $375,000
Center for Composites Manufacturing, AL.................       1,000,000
Detroit Airport Rail Project, MI........................         200,000
Detroit Area Regional Transportation Authority Studies, 
    MI..................................................         750,000
Electric Transit Vehicle Institute, TN..................         500,000
I-93 Corridor Transit Investment Study, NH..............       1,000,000
National Bio-terrorism Civilian Medical Response Center, 
    PA..................................................       1,000,000
National Deployment of the ITN America, ME..............         500,000
NDSU Transit Center for Small Urban Areas, ND...........         400,000
Rich Passage Passenger Ferry Project, WA................       1,000,000
Rockford-Belvidere, Transit Feasibility Study, IL.......         250,000
Transit Usage, Home Interview Survey Study, UT..........         500,000
Washington State Ferries Wireless Connection Project, WA       1,000,000
WVU Exhaust Emmissions Testing, WV......................       1,400,000
Zinc-air Zero emmissions bus, NV........................       1,500,000
Project ACTION..........................................       3,000,000

                      Trust Fund Share of Expenses


                (LIQUIDATION OF CONTRACT AUTHORIZATION)

                          (HIGHWAY TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................($5,398,000,000)
Budget estimate, 2003................................... (5,781,000,000)
Committee recommendation................................  5,781,000,000 

    For fiscal year 2003, the Committee has provided 
$5,781,000,000 in liquidating cash for the trust fund share of 
transit expenses associated with the following programs: 
administrative expenses, formula grants, university 
transportation research, transit planning and research, job 
access and reverse commute grants, and capital investment 
grants. This level of funds is equal to the total budget 
authority from the highway trust fund inside the transit 
firewall as outlined in the transportation discretionary 
spending guarantee subtitle of the Transportation Equity Act 
for the 21st Century.

                       Capital Investment Grants


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                General funds     Trust funds         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\.....................................     $618,200,000   $2,272,800,000   $2,891,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003........................................      607,200,000    2,428,800,000    3,036,000,000
Committee recommendation.....................................      707,200,000    2,428,800,000    3,136,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Includes $50,000,000 transferred from formula grants pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and excludes $100,000,000
  in Emergency supplemental funding provided pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

    Section 5309 of 49 U.S.C. authorizes discretionary grants 
or loans to States and local public bodies and agencies thereof 
to be used in financing mass transportation investments. 
Investments may include construction of new fixed guideway 
systems and extensions to existing guideway systems; major bus 
fleet expansions and bus facility construction; and fixed 
guideway expenditures for existing systems.
    The Committee action provides a level of $3,136,000,000. 
Within this total, $2,428,800,000 is from the ``Mass transit'' 
account of the highway trust fund, and no more than 
$707,200,000 shall be appropriated from general funds. The 
following table summarizes the Committee recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                   2002 program     2003 budget      Committee
                                                                       level         estimate     recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Bus and bus facilities..........................................    $618,200,000    $607,200,000    $607,200,000
Fixed guideway modernization....................................   1,136,400,000   1,214,400,000   1,214,400,000
New systems and new extensions..................................   1,136,400,000   1,214,400,000   1,314,400,000
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total.....................................................   2,891,000,000   3,036,000,000   3,136,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Limited extensions of discretionary funds.--There have been 
occasions when the Committee has extended the availability of 
capital investment funds. These extensions are granted on a 
case by case basis and, in nearly all instances, are due to 
circumstances that were unforeseen by the project's sponsor. 
The availability of these particular funds are intended for one 
additional year, absent further congressional direction. The 
Committee directs the FTA not to reallocate funds provided in 
fiscal year 1999 and fiscal year 2000 for the following 
projects:
  --Santa Fe/El Dorado, New Mexico rail link project
  --Albuquerque, New Mexico light rail project
  --Tuscaloosa, Alabama intermodal center
  --Kenosha-Racine-Milwaukee, Wisconsin rail extension project
  --Northern New Mexico park and ride facilities and State of 
        New Mexico, Buses and Bus-Related Facilities
  --Birmingham, Alabama transit corridor project
  --Harrisburg, Pennsylvania-Capital Area Transit/Corridor One 
        commuter rail project
  --Charleston, South Carolina monobeam corridor project
  --King County, Washington park and ride expansion
  --Sequim, Washington--Clallam Transit multimodal center
  --Birmingham-Jefferson County, Alabama buses
  --Roaring Fork Transportation Authority, CO
  --Dothan Wiregrass, Alabama vehicles and transit facility
  --Jefferson/Montevallo, Alabama pedestrian walkway
  --Montgomery, Alabama Union Station intermodal center
  --Pritchard, Alabama bus transfer center
  --West Virginia statewide intermodal facility and buses
    Bill language.--The bill contains a general provision (sec. 
322) reprogramming funds provided in previous fiscal years for 
the following project:
  --Wilmington, Delaware downtown transit connector (fiscal 
        year 2000 and fiscal year 2001)--to be made available 
        for Wilmington, Delaware commuter rail improvements.
The Committee has also included a general provision (sec. 337) 
permitting urbanized areas that grew from less than 200,000 
people to more than 200,000 people as a result of the 2000 
census to use an amount of Federal transit funds equal to the 
amount they were allowed to use for operating purposes in 
fiscal year 2002. The provision also permits areas that were 
merged into a larger urbanized area as a result of the 2000 
census to use Federal transit funds for operating purposes 
equal to the amount in fiscal year 2002. The Committee is 
including this provision for fiscal year 2003 only in order to 
give the authorizing committees time to address this issue in 
surface transportation reauthorization legislation next year.

                         BUS AND BUS FACILITIES

    The Committee recommendation for bus and bus facilities 
funding is $657,200,000. These funds may be used to replace, 
rehabilitate, and purchase buses and related equipment and to 
construct bus-related facilities. Funds for bus and bus 
facilities shall be distributed as follows:

        Project                                                   Amount

AC Transit Buses and Bus Facilities, CA.................      $1,000,000
Adams Transit Authority Facility, PA....................         400,000
Ajo to Phoenix Bus Service, AZ..........................         200,000
Alabama A&M University bus & bus facilities, AL.........         500,000
Alabama State Docks Intermodal Facility, AL.............      10,000,000
Alabama Statewide Bus Facilities and Ancillary 
    Equipment, AL.......................................       3,000,000
Alabama Statewide Replacement of Senior Center Vans, AL.       4,500,000
Albuquerque, NM bus and bus facilities..................         300,000
Allegheny Port Authority Buses, PA......................       1,000,000
Allentown Intermodal Transportation Center, PA..........       3,000,000
Altoona Metro Transit buses, PA.........................         500,000
Anchorage Int'l Airport Intermodal Facility, AK.........       2,000,000
Anchorage Transfer Facility, AK.........................       3,000,000
Ann Arbor Transportation Authority Bus & Bus Facilities, 
    MI..................................................       3,000,000
Area Transportation Authority Buses, North Central PA...       3,000,000
Area VII Agency on Aging Bus and Bus Facility, MT.......       1,000,000
Arkansas Statewide, AR..................................      10,000,000
Attleboro Intermodal Facility, MA.......................         750,000
Aurora Avenue Bus Rapid Transit, WA.....................       2,000,000
Austin Bus Projects, TX.................................       8,000,000
Bay Area Transportation Authority Buses, Traverse City, 
    MI..................................................       1,000,000
Beaumont buses, TX......................................         300,000
Beaver County Transit Authority, Buses, PA..............         500,000
Bergen County Intermodal Park-n-Ride & Facilities, NJ...       1,750,000
Berks Area Reading Transportation Buses, PA.............       1,000,000
Bi-State Development Agency Bus Replacement, MO.........       3,000,000
Blue Water Area Transit bus facility, Port Huron MI.....       2,000,000
Bridgeport High Speed Ferry Terminal Project, CT........       2,000,000
Brockton Intermodal Transportation Center, MA...........       1,500,000
Brookhaven Multi-Modal Transportation Center, MS........       2,000,000
Broward County Buses and Bus Facility, FL...............       2,000,000
Brownsville buses, TX...................................         300,000
BRT Systems, Appurtenances & Facilities, HI.............      11,000,000
Buffalo Auditorium Intermodal Center, NY................       5,000,000
Burien transit center, transit oriented development, WA.       2,000,000
Bus Rapid Transit Project, Las Vegas Blvd., NV..........       5,000,000
Capital Area Transist buses, PA.........................         500,000
Capital Area Transportation Authority (CATA), Lansing , 
    MI..................................................       3,000,000
Cedar Falls, Multimodal Facility, IA....................       1,100,000
Cherry Street Multimodal Facility, IN...................       1,300,000
Chittenden County Transit Authority Bus and Facility, VT       4,000,000
Cincinnati Government Square Transit Transfer Center, OH       6,400,000
Coffman-Cove Inner-island Ferry/Bus Terminal, AK........       2,000,000
Colorado Statewide, CO..................................       9,000,000
Connecticut State-wide Buses, CT........................       3,000,000
C-Tran, Vancouver Mall transit center, WA...............       2,700,000
Delaware Statewide Buses................................       3,250,000
East Central Florida Transit Coalition, Bus and 
    Facilities, FL......................................      11,000,000
East Palo Alto Buses, CA................................         400,000
Easton Intermodal Terminal, PA..........................       2,000,000
Edmonds Crossing multi-modal project, WA................       4,000,000
El Paso Bus Projects, TX................................       4,000,000
Espanola ADA van & Compressed Gas Equipment, NM.........          75,000
Fairbanks Intermodal Facility, AK.......................         250,000
Fairbanks Rail/Bus Transfer Facility, AK................       2,000,000
Ferguson van replacement, MO............................          45,000
Flint Mass Transportation Authority bus and bus 
    facilities, MI......................................       3,750,000
Fort Smith Bus, AR......................................       1,500,000
Fresno Buses, CA........................................         600,000
Fort Worth buses, TX....................................         500,000
Galveston Buses, TX.....................................       2,000,000
Gardena Municipal Bus Lines, CA.........................         350,000
Georgia Statewide, Bus Replacement Program..............       1,500,000
Gloucester Co Sr. Buses, NJ.............................         350,000
Greater Minnesota Transit Authority Bus & Bus 
    Facilities, MN......................................       9,500,000
Greater Triskett Bus Garage Rehabilitation, OH..........       3,000,000
GRTA Express Bus & Facility, GA.........................       8,000,000
Hampton Roads Transit Facility Replacement, VA..........       4,000,000
Hartford Downtown Circulator, CT........................       2,800,000
Hartford-New Britain Busway Project, CT.................      14,000,000
Hattiesburg Intermodal Facility, MS.....................       3,500,000
Hawaii Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities, HI.............       6,000,000
Hazelwood van expansion, MO.............................          80,000
Henderson County Facility, KY...........................       2,000,000
Hershey Intermodal Transportation Center, PA............       2,000,000
Hoover & Vestavia Hills Diesel Hybrid Electric Buses, AL       1,000,000
Houston buses, MO.......................................         100,000
Huntsville Int'l Airport Intermodal Center Phase III, AL       3,000,000
Idaho Transit Coalition Bus and Bus Facilities..........       2,500,000
Illinois Statewide, IL..................................      10,000,000
Indiana Transit Consortium..............................       2,000,000
Indianapolis Downtown Transit Center, IN................       4,500,000
Intermodal/Inland Port Terminal, SC.....................       5,000,000
Iowa City Intermodal Transit Facility, IA...............       8,000,000
Iowa Statewide..........................................       6,500,000
Jackson Transportation Authority Bus Facility, MI.......         500,000
Jamaica Intermodal Facilities, NY.......................       3,000,000
Jefferson City Transit bus and van, MO..................       2,000,000
Johnson County Transit Programs, KS.....................         500,000
Kalamazoo Transportation Center, MI.....................       2,900,000
Kansas City KCATA Buses, MO.............................       3,750,000
Kansas Statewide........................................       3,000,000
Knoxville Electric Transit Intermodal Center, TN........       3,400,000
LSU Health Sciences Center, Shreveport Intermodal 
    Facility, LA........................................       2,000,000
Lane Transit District Bus Facility, OR..................       6,000,000
Las Vegas Downtown Transportation Center, NV............       4,500,000
Las Vegas Transit Access Project, NV....................         500,000
Livermore Valley Center Project, CA.....................         300,000
Lorain Renovation Train Depot in a Multi-modal Hub, OH..       2,400,000
Los Angeles MTA Bus and Bus Facility, CA................       5,000,000
Los Angeles to Pasadena Construction Authority 
    Intermodal Centers, CA..............................       3,000,000
Louisiana Statewide.....................................      13,000,000
Lowell-Gallagher Intermodal Facility, MA................       1,000,000
Lubbock buses, TX.......................................         500,000
Macon Union Station Intermodal Center Rehabilitation, GA       2,000,000
Marquette County Transit Authority bus and bus 
    facilities, MI......................................       2,750,000
MARTA Bus Replacement & clean fuel buses & facilities, 
    GA..................................................      10,000,000
Maryland Statewide......................................      13,000,000
Maui County buses, HI...................................       1,500,000
Memphis Airport Intermodal Facility Improvements, TN....       3,000,000
Metro Area Transit--Intermodal Facility, NE.............       2,000,000
Metro Area Transit,South Omaha/Stockyard Center, NE.....       1,500,000
Metro Transit Bus & Bus facilities, Twin Cities, MN.....       7,000,000
Miami-Dade County, Buses Acquisition, FL................       3,000,000
Michigan Statewide, Buses & Bus Facilities..............       4,000,000
Missouri Statewide Bus and Bus Facility Projects........       5,500,000
Mobile Health Service Buses, NYC, NY....................         750,000
Modesto Bus Maintenance Facility, CA....................         500,000
Montclair State Univ.Campus & Community Bus System, NJ..       1,500,000
Monterey-Salinas Transit (MST) Bus and Bus Facilities, 
    CA..................................................         500,000
Montgomery County FDA Transit Center, MD................         375,000
Montpelier Multimodal Center, VT........................       3,000,000
Mount Vernon multi-modal facility, WA...................       1,160,000
Mountain Line Buses, Missoula MT........................       1,000,000
Municipal Transit Operators Coalition, Long Beach, CA...       1,750,000
Nebraska Statewide......................................       2,000,000
New Hampshire Statewide Bus Acq., NH....................       3,000,000
New York CNG Urban Buses, NY............................       4,000,000
Newport Trolley Project, RI.............................         500,000
Niagara Falls International Train Station, NY...........       1,500,000
Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority Buses, 
    Facilities, NY......................................       2,500,000
Normal Multi-modal Facility, IL.........................       1,750,000
North Carolina Statewide................................       8,000,000
North Dakota Statewide..................................       2,900,000
OATS Bus and Bus Facilities, MO.........................       3,000,000
Oceangateway Development Project, ME....................       1,500,000
Ohio Statewide Bus and Bus Facilities...................       8,000,000
Oklahoma statewide buses and bus facilities.............      12,000,000
OSU Multimodal Transportation Facility, OK..............       4,500,000
Palo Alto Bus Facility, CA..............................         400,000
Penn Station Platform Extension, NJ.....................       2,000,000
Pierce County bus and bus facilities, WA................       3,000,000
Port Angeles, International Gateway project, WA.........       1,500,000
Port MacKenzie Intermodal Facility, AK..................       2,000,000
Port of Anchorage Intermodal Facility, AK...............       1,000,000
Potomac & Rappahannock PRTC, Buses, VA..................       2,000,000
Premium Commuter Service Pilot Program, RI..............       1,250,000
Pullman Multi-modal Center, PA..........................       1,000,000
Reno and Sparks Downtown Facilities, NV.................       6,200,000
Rhode Island Statewide..................................       7,000,000
Richmond Multi-modal Facility, VA.......................       4,000,000
Rio Rancho, Buses and Bus Facilities, NM................         250,000
Rochester Genesee Transportation Authority's Buses, NY..       1,500,000
Rosebud Sioux Tribe Bus Facility, SD....................         206,500
Rural Transit Buses & Facilities, NV....................       2,000,000
Sacramento Regional Transit District Bus Facility, CA...       1,250,000
Saginaw Transit Authority Regional Service buses, MI....         500,000
Salem Area Mass Transit Bus and Bus Facility, OR........       2,000,000
San Antonio, Transit Bus System Modernization, TX.......       3,000,000
San Francisco Muni, Bus and Bus Facilities, CA..........       5,000,000
Santa Barbara Bus and Bus Facilities, CA................         750,000
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority Buses, CA...       2,000,000
Santa Fe bus and bus facility, NM.......................       1,000,000
Section 5327 Oversight Activities.......................       5,493,500
SEPTA Intermodal Facility, Bucks County, PA.............       2,000,000
SEPTA Norristown Intermodal Facility, PA................       4,000,000
Seward Buses & Bus Facility, AK.........................         200,000
Ship Creek Pedestrian & Intermodal Facility, AK.........       1,000,000
Sierra Madre CNG Fueling Station, CA....................         200,000
Small Bus System Program of Projects, WA................       2,140,000
SMART bus and bus facilities, Oakland County MI.........       1,000,000
Snohomish County Community Transit park and ride, WA....       3,500,000
Sound Transit regional transit hubs, WA.................       5,000,000
South Bend TRANSPO Buses, IN............................       1,500,000
South Carolina Statewide................................      14,000,000
Southeast Missouri Trans. Services Bus & Bus Facilities, 
    MO..................................................         500,000
Spokane bus and bus facilities, WA......................       3,000,000
Springfield Transportation Department Buses, MO.........       2,000,000
Springfield Union Station, MA...........................       8,000,000
St. Charles buses and equipment, MO.....................         245,000
St. Johnsbury Transit Center Rehabilitation, VT.........         250,000
St. Joseph Buses, MO....................................       2,000,000
START Bus Service, AZ...................................         300,000
Stoddard County van, MO.................................          30,000
TEA21 Setaside (Georgetown and Altoona).................       7,850,000
Tennessee Statewide Buses and Bus Facility, TN..........       9,500,000
Thompkins Consolidated Area Transit Bus & bus facility, 
    NY..................................................       1,000,000
Topeka Transit Buses, KS................................       1,500,000
Transit Authority of N. Kentucky Buses and bus facility, 
    KY..................................................       1,000,000
Trenton Station Intermodal Project, NJ..................      12,000,000
Tri-Met Buses, Portland, OR.............................       3,000,000
Troy State University Bus Shuttle Program, AL...........       1,500,000
TTA Transit Authority Bus and Van Purchase, WV..........       1,800,000
Tucson Downtown Intermodal Center, AZ...................       3,000,000
UNI Intermodal Facility, IA.............................       1,250,000
Union Station Restoration, NY...........................       1,250,000
Union Station/Molton Street Multimodal Facility, AL.....       5,000,000
University of North Alabama Transit Projects, AL........       2,000,000
University of Rhode Island Student Transportation 
    Services, RI........................................       1,250,000
UTA and Park City Transit Buses, UT.....................       5,000,000
Utah Statewide regional intermodal transportation 
    centers, UT.........................................       1,000,000
Valley Metro/RPTA, Buses & Bus Facilities, Phoenix, AZ..       8,000,000
Wabash Landing Transit Bus and Bus Facility, IN.........       1,000,000
Wasilla Intermodal Facility, AK.........................         900,000
Wesbrook Parking Garage/Intermodal Facility, ME.........       1,000,000
West Coast Florida Bus Coalition, Buses & Bus 
    Facilities, FL......................................       8,000,000
West Lafayette Articulated Buses, IN....................       2,000,000
West Virginia Statewide.................................       4,000,000
Westchester County Bee-Line Buses, NY...................       1,500,000
Wilkes-Barre Intermodal Facility, PA....................       1,000,000
Wisconsin Statewide.....................................      12,500,000
WMATA Clean Fleet Bus Program, VA.......................       3,000,000
Wyandotte Co. Buses, KS.................................         500,000
Wyoming Bus & Bus Facilities, WY........................       2,500,000
York County Transit Authority, Buses, PA................       1,500,000

    Illinois Statewide Buses.--The Committee provide 
$10,000,000 to the Illinois Department of Transportation (IDOT) 
for Section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities grants. The Committee 
expects IDOT to provide at least $5,000,000 for Downstate 
Illinois replacement buses in Bloomington-Normal, Peoria, 
Macomb, Madison County, Rock Island, Rosiclare, Kankakee, 
Quincy, Rockford, and Springfield. Further, the Committee 
expects IDOT to provide appropriate funds for bus facilities in 
Champaign-Urbana (University of Illinois Park and Ride/Daycare 
Center), Galesburg, Rockford, and Springfield.
    Washington Statewide Small Transit Systems, Buses and Bus 
Facilities.--The Committee provides $2,140,000 to the 
Washington State Department of Transportation (WSDOT) for 
Section 5309 Bus and Bus Facilities grants. The Committee 
expects WSDOT to fund the following projects: (1) $432,000 to 
Grant Transit Authority; (2) $144,000 to Grays Harbor 
Transportation; (3) $288,000 to Island Transit; (4) $96,000 to 
Pacific Transit; and, (5) $1,180,000 to Pullman Transit.

                      fixed guideway modernization

    The Committee recommends a total of $1,214,400,000 for the 
modernization of existing rail transit systems. Under TEA21 all 
of the funds are distributed by formula. The following table 
itemizes the fiscal year 2002 rail modernization allocations by 
State:

  Estimated fiscal year 2003 section 5309 fixed guideway modernization

                                                             Fiscal year
        State                                                2003 budget

Alaska..................................................      $2,423,937
Arizona.................................................       1,845,317
California..............................................     139,151,518
Colorado................................................       2,261,031
Connecticut.............................................      40,546,804
District of Columbia....................................      57,562,724
Florida.................................................      19,685,468
Georgia.................................................      27,042,153
Hawaii..................................................       1,304,537
Illinois................................................     131,151,605
Indiana.................................................       8,972,016
Louisiana...............................................       2,972,818
Maryland................................................      29,372,229
Massachusetts...........................................      75,767,529
Michigan................................................         575,906
Minnesota...............................................       5,896,427
Missouri................................................       5,008,671
New Jersey..............................................     104,313,737
New York................................................     368,542,791
Ohio....................................................      18,427,652
Oregon..................................................       4,930,300
Pennsylvania............................................     100,301,564
Puerto Rico.............................................       2,722,582
Rhode Island............................................          98,373
Tennessee...............................................         406,222
Texas...................................................       9,197,893
Virginia................................................      18,194,293
Washington..............................................      22,695,789
Wisconsin...............................................         884,114
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total.............................................   1,202,256,000
One percent oversight...................................      12,144,000
                    --------------------------------------------------------
                    ____________________________________________________
      Total appropriation...............................   1,214,400,000

                               NEW STARTS

    The bill provides $1,314,400,000 for New Starts. These 
funds are available for major investment studies, preliminary 
engineering, right-of-way acquisition, project management, 
oversight, and construction for new systems and extensions. 
Under section 3009(g) of TEA21, there is an 8-percent statutory 
cap on the amount made available for activities other than 
final design and construction--that is, alternatives analysis, 
environmental impact statements, preliminary engineering, major 
investment studies, and other predesign and preconstruction 
activities.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The bill allocates the funds provided for New Starts as 
follows:

        Project                                                   Amount

Alaska-Hawaii Setaside..................................     $10,296,000
Allegheny Port Authority, Stage II Light Rail Transit, 
    PA..................................................      25,600,000
Altamont Commuter Express San Jose to Stockton, CA......       2,000,000
Anderson County, South Carolina Transit System, SC......       6,000,000
Baltimore Central Light Rail Double Track Project, MD...      24,000,000
BART, SFO Extension, CA.................................     100,000,000
Birmingham Transit Corridor Study/PE, AL................       3,000,000
Boston, North Shore Corridor Project, MA................       1,000,000
Bridgeport Intermodal Corridor Project, CT..............       8,000,000
Burlington-Middlebury Commuter Rail, VT.................       2,000,000
Canal Streetcar, New Orleans, LA........................      30,000,000
Charlotte South Corridor Light Rail Project, NC.........      10,000,000
Chicago, Douglas Blue Line Project, IL..................      55,000,000
Chicago, METRA, Expansion Project, IL...................      52,000,000
Chicago, Ravenswood Brown Line Expansion Project, IL....       4,000,000
DART, Suburban Areas Extension, Dallas, TX..............      60,000,000
Dulles Link Project, VA.................................      25,000,000
East Side Access Project, NY............................      15,000,000
Euclid Corridor Transportation Project, Cleveland, OH...       6,000,000
Houston Advanced Metro Transit Plan.....................      23,400,000
Hudson-Bergen, Hoboken to Tonnelle Ave., NJ.............      40,000,000
Hudson-Bergen, Jersey City, Bayonne & Hoboken, NJ.......      19,000,000
Interstate MAX Light Rail Transit Extension Project, OR.      70,000,000
Johnson County Commuter Rail, KS........................         400,000
Little Rock River Rail, AR..............................       4,000,000
Los Angeles East Side MTA, CA...........................      10,000,000
Los Angeles, North Hollywood Extension, CA..............      40,000,000
Lowell, MA to Nashua, NH Commuter Rail Ext. Project, NH.       3,000,000
MARC Expansion Project, MD..............................      14,000,000
MARTA North Line Extension Project Completion, GA.......      16,000,000
MATA Medical Rail Extension, TN.........................      10,000,000
Medical Center Light Rail Extension, UT.................      12,000,000
Metro Link Commuter Rail, St. Clair Extension Project, 
    IL..................................................       3,000,000
Metro North Rolling Stock, CT...........................       7,000,000
Nashville Light Rail, TN................................       4,000,000
Newark-Elizabeth Rail Link, 15 Station Light Rail Line, 
    NJ..................................................      60,000,000
North Shore Connector Project, Pittsburgh, PA...........       4,000,000
North/South TRAX Light Rail Transit Line, UT............       1,000,000
Oceanside-Escondido Light Rail Project, CA..............      20,000,000
Ogden to Provo Commuter Rail Corridor, UT...............       6,000,000
Pawtucket Layover Facility, RI..........................       4,500,000
Port McKenzie Ferry, AK.................................       5,000,000
Raleigh, Triangle Transit Project, NC...................      15,000,000
Resort Corridor Project, NV.............................      10,000,000
Salt Lake City University TRAX Light Rail Transit Line, 
    UT..................................................      69,000,000
San Diego Mission Valley East Line Project, CA..........      65,000,000
San Juan--Tren Urbano...................................      45,000,000
Santa Fe/El Dorado Rail Link, NM........................       2,000,000
Scranton to New York City Passenger Rail Service, PA....       3,000,000
SEPTA Schuylkill Valley Metro Project, PA...............      15,000,000
Sounder Commuter Rail, WA...............................      30,000,000
Stamford Urban Transitway, Phase 2 Project, CT..........      15,000,000
T-REX Southeast Light Rail Corridor, CO.................      70,000,000
Tri-Rail, Double Track Improvement, FL..................      25,000,000
Twin Cities Hiawatha & Northstar Projects, MN...........      60,000,000
Vermont Transportation Authority Rolling Stock, VT......       2,000,000
Virginia Railway Express VRE, Project, VA...............       4,500,000
Wilmington Train Station improvements, DE...............       4,000,000
Wilsonville to Beaverton Commuter Rail Project, OR......       5,000,000
WMATA Addison Rd, Largo Extension, MD...................      60,000,000

    Anderson County, South Carolina Transit System.--The 
Anderson County trolley system would prove an integral part of 
the commuter population in Anderson County. It would move 
people, many of which are low income, from their homes to jobs 
by using the rail system. This would create a more efficient 
and environmentally conscious answer to the overburdened system 
currently in place. The project is currently in alternatives 
analysis. The Committee has recommended $6,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Atlanta, Georgia, north line extension project.--The 
Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority (MARTA) has 
completed construction of a 2.3-mile, 2-station extension of 
the North Line from the Dunwoody station to North Springs. This 
extension initiated Revenue Operations on December 16, 2001. 
This extension serves the rapidly-growing area north of 
Atlanta, which includes Perimeter Center and north Fulton 
County, and connects this area with the rest of the region by 
providing better transit service for both commuters and inner-
city residents traveling to expanding job opportunities. On 
December 20, 1994, FTA issued an FFGA committing a total of 
$305,010,000 in New Starts funding to this project. In the 
Conference Report to the fiscal year 2000 appropriations act, 
FTA was instructed to amend the FFGA for this project to 
incorporate a change in scope as authorized under section 
3030(d)(2) of TEA21. Accordingly, on March 2, 2000, FTA amended 
the FFGA to include 28 additional railcars, a multilevel 
parking facility in lieu of a surface parking lot, and 
enhancements to customer security and amenity measures at the 
Sandy Springs and North Springs stations. The total cost of the 
amended project is $463,180,000, with $370,540,000 from the 
section 5309 New Starts program. Of the $65,530,000 increase in 
Federal funding, $10,670,000 was applied from unexpended prior-
year funds identified from cost savings on the Dunwoody section 
of the North Line extension. Including these prior-year funds, 
a total of $354,500,000 has been appropriated for this project 
through fiscal year 2002. This leaves $16,100,000 remaining in 
the amended FFGA for this project. The Committee has 
recommended $16,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Baltimore/Central LRT Double-Tracking.--The Maryland Mass 
Transit Administration is constructing 9.4-miles of track to 
upgrade designated areas of the Baltimore Central Corridor 
Light Rail Line that are currently single track. The Central 
Corridor is 29-miles long and operates between Hunt Valley in 
the north to Cromwell/Glen Burnie in the south, serving 
Baltimore City and Baltimore and Anne Arundel Counties, with 
extensions providing direct service to the Amtrak Penn Station 
and the Baltimore-Washington International Airport. This 
project double-tracks eight sections of the Central Corridor 
between Timonium and Cromwell Station/Glen Burnie, for a total 
of 9.4-miles. Although no new stations are required, the 
addition of a second track will require construction of second 
station platforms at four stations. Other elements included in 
the project are bridge and crossing improvements, a bi-
directional signal system with traffic signal preemption on 
Howard Street, and catenary and other equipment and systems. 
The double tracking will be constructed almost entirely in 
existing right-of-way. In July 2001, FTA and MTA entered into a 
FFGA in the amount of $120,000,000 in 5309 New Starts funds. 
The total estimated cost of the project is $153,700,000 
(escalated dollars). A total of $21,490,000 has been 
appropriated through fiscal year 2002. The Committee has 
recommended $24,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Birmingham, Alabama, transit corridor project.--The 
Birmingham Metropolitan Planning Organization (MPO) completed a 
Regional Transit Feasibility Analysis as part of the Strategic 
Regional Multi-modal Mobility Plan (Plan) in November 1999. The 
overall Plan includes a congestion management system element 
and a feasibility determination for regional transportation and 
transit improvements for the Birmingham Metropolitan Planning 
Area of Jefferson and Shelby Counties. In the Phase I regional 
transportation and investment planning process, the 
transportation alternatives that were identified included 
highway improvements, high-occupancy vehicle (HOV) lanes, 
improved fixed-route transit service, circulator and feeder bus 
service, express bus service operating from park-and-ride lots 
on HOV lanes and light rail transit. The conclusions from the 
Phase I effort included, among other findings, the need to 
address long-term dedicated public transit funding and land 
development policies. The Birmingham MPO, representing local 
municipal and county governments, in cooperation with the 
Birmingham-Jefferson County Transit Authority, is conducting 
Phase II. Phase II will identify the locally preferred 
alternative in each corridor in accordance with FTA's 
regulations for Major Capital Investment Projects. Phase II is 
scheduled for completion in fiscal year 2002. Through fiscal 
year 2002, Congress has appropriated $10,860,000 in section 
5309 New Starts funds for this effort and it has been 
authorized in TEA21. The Committee has recommended $3,000,000 
in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Burlington, Vermont, Burlington to Middlebury rail line 
project.--The Vermont Agency of Transportation and Vermont Rail 
Division are working to slowly rehabilitate the rail system 
along the western side of the State to provide faster and more 
efficient service to a greater amount of people in Vermont. 
Given the overwhelming success of the Champlain Flyer commuter 
rail line from Burlington to Charlotte, Vermont. This new rail 
line would extend service to Middlebury as well as add more 
daily travelers on the rail system. The Committee has 
recommended $2,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Charlotte, North Carolina, south corridor light rail 
transit project.--The Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS), in 
cooperation with the City of Charlotte, is proposing to design 
and construct an 11.2-mile light rail transit line extending 
from Uptown Charlotte to the Town on Pineville, North Carolina, 
near the South Carolina border. The proposed project is 
currently planned to operate within portions of existing 
Norfolk-Southern (NS) railroad rights-of-way (ROW), including 
sharing ROW with the city's existing downtown trolley system. 
The south corridor is an area generally paralleling I-77 along 
NS railroad ROW in the City of Charlotte and Mecklenburg 
County. A 3.7-mile portion of the proposed system--between 
Uptown and Scaleybark Road--would operate on abandoned NS ROW 
owned by the City of Charlotte. The remainder of the planned 
system (7.3 miles) would operate on separate tracks generally 
paralleling NS ROW. The proposed project also includes 
construction of 16 stations, purchase of up to 15 light rail 
vehicles and the construction of a light rail vehicle 
maintenance and storage facility. Seven proposed stations from 
I-485 north to Scaleybark Road will include park-and-ride lots 
and serve as transfer points for local and express bus service. 
Total capital costs for the south corridor project are 
estimated at $348,200,000. The Federal share is estimated to be 
$174,000,100 (50 percent). Through fiscal year 2002, Congress 
has appropriated $19,780,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds 
for this effort. It has also been authorized under TEA21. The 
Committee has recommended $10,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Chicago, Illinois, Douglas Branch reconstruction project.--
The Chicago Transit Authority (CTA) has implemented a complete 
reconstruction of the approximately 6.6-mile length of the 
existing Douglas Branch heavy rail line. The line extends from 
just west of downtown Chicago to its terminus at Cermak Avenue. 
The Douglas Branch was built in the late 19th and early 20th 
centuries. Due to its age, the line has become seriously 
deteriorated resulting in high maintenance and operating costs 
and declining service. The Douglas Branch currently carries 
approximately 27,000 average weekday boardings utilizing 11 
stations. In the year 2020, CTA expects that the project would 
serve 6,000 daily new riders. It serves one of the most 
economically distressed areas in Chicago; low income households 
make up 30 percent of the total number of households within 
walking distance of the stations. The line has been in 
operation for over 100 years, and serves neighborhoods that 
originally developed along the system. The corridor contains an 
estimated 54,000 jobs and 115,000 residents within one-half 
mile of the stations, and serves the University of Illinois at 
Chicago (25,000 students) and a large, dense central business 
district with an estimated 339,000 jobs. Population and 
employment densities are high, averaging 9,100 jobs and nearly 
20,000 people per square mile. After ``looping'' through the 
central business district, the Blue Line also extends to O'Hare 
International Airport and the Medical Center Complex. The total 
capital cost of the Douglas Branch reconstruction project is 
estimated at $482,500,000. The Douglas Branch is authorized for 
final design and construction by section 3030(a)(106) of TEA21. 
FTA and CTA entered into an FFGA in January 2001 committing 
$320,100,000 in Section 5309 New Starts funds to this project. 
A total of $52,200,000 has been appropriated through fiscal 
year 2002. This leaves $267,900,000 needed to fulfill the FFGA. 
The Committee has recommended $55,000,000 in New Starts funding 
for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Chicago, Illinois, Metra North Central, Southwest Corridor 
Commuter Rails, and Union Pacific West line extension 
project.--Metra, the commuter rail division of the Regional 
Transportation Authority (RTA) of northeastern Illinois, will 
construct 16.3 miles of a second mainline track, including a 
2.3-mile stretch of third track, along the existing 55-mile 
North Central Service (NCS) commuter rail line to accommodate 
increased service and operating speeds. The project also 
includes the construction of five new stations, parking 
facilities and the purchase of two diesel locomotives. The 
North Central Corridor extends from downtown Chicago to Antioch 
on the Illinois-Wisconsin border, traversing suburban Cook and 
Lake counties. Metra estimates that 8,400 average weekday 
boardings will occur on the NCS line in the year 2020. The 
total capital cost of the North Centeral project is estimated 
at $225,520,000, of which Metra is expected to seek 
$135,320,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. The North 
Central Corridor extends from downtown Chicago to Antioch on 
the Illinois-Wisconsin border, and traverses suburban Lake 
County. It includes the two most significant hubs of employment 
in the six-county northeastern Illinois region, the Chicago CBD 
and the area surrounding O'Hare International Airport. Metra 
estimates that this project will serve an average of 8,400 
average weekday boardings by 2020, with 8,000 daily new riders. 
This project has been rated ``medium'' for both project 
justification and finance, earning an overall rating of 
``recommended.'' FTA approved entry into the final design stage 
of development in October 2000. Section 3030(a)(10) of TEA21 
authorizes the North Central project for final design and 
construction. The North Central Full Funding Grant Agreement 
was signed on November 5, 2001. Through fiscal year 2002, a 
total of $51,260,000 was provided for the Metra North Central 
project. Metra, the commuter rail division of the RTA of 
Northeast Illinois (NE IL), will construct an additional 12 
miles of trackage within an existing 33-mile corridor 
connecting Union Station in downtown Chicago to 179th Street in 
Orland Park, Illinois. The Southwest Corridor (SWC) commuter 
rail project would extend commuter rail service from Orland 
Park southwest to Manhattan, Illinois. The project also 
includes the construction of 3.3 miles of a second mainline, 
three additional stations, parking facilities and multiple 
improvements to tracks, signals, stations, and other 
facilities. Section 3030(a)(12) of TEA21 authorized the 
``Southwest extension''. The total cost of the Southwest 
Corridor commuter rail project is estimated at $198,176,649. 
Through fiscal year 2002, $38,500,000 was provided for the 
Southwest Corridor project. Metra and FTA entered into a FFGA 
in November 2001 committing $103,020,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funds to the project. Metra, the commuter rail division 
of the RTA of NE IL, is implementing an 8.5-mile extension to 
the existing 35-mile Union Pacific West Line (UPW). The project 
would extend the line approximately 8.5 miles west from Geneva 
to Elburn, Illinois. The project also includes multiple 
improvements to track and signals, construction of two new 
stations, parking facilities, the purchase of two diesel 
locomotives and the construction of a new overnight train 
storage yard. Section 3030(a)(13) of TEA21 authorizes this 
project as the Chicago ``west line extension''. The total 
capital costs of the Union Pacific West Line Extension is 
estimated at $134,603,334 (escalated dollars) in Federal New 
Starts funding (60 percent). Through fiscal year 2002, a total 
of $34,840,000 has been appropriated for the UPW project. The 
Committee has recommended a combined amount of $52,000,000 in 
New Starts funding for these three projects in fiscal year 
2003.
    Chicago, Illinois, Ravenswood reconstruction project.--The 
Chicago Transit Authority is proposing to reconstruct existing 
platforms and expand stations along the Ravenswood (Brown) Line 
to accommodate eight-car trains, increasing the overall 
capacity of the line. The Ravenswood Line extends 9.3 miles 
from the north side of Chicago to the ``Loop elevated'' in 
downtown Chicago and includes 19 stations. The majority of the 
Brown line is operated on an elevated structure except one 
portion near the north end of the line, which operates at 
grade. The Brown line was built between 1900 and 1907. CTA 
anticipates approximately 68,000 average weekday boardings, 
including 12,300 daily new riders, in the year 2020 on the 
Ravenswood Line. The proposed project would expand stations and 
platforms and straighten curves to allow CTA to operate longer 
trains, which would increase the capacity of the line. Section 
3030(a)(11) of TEA21 authorized the project. In November 1997, 
CTA included the Ravenswood line expansion project in the 
region's financially constrained long-range transportation 
plan. The environmental review process for the Ravenswood Line 
Expansion Project was completed in July 2002. A Finding of No 
Significant Impact was determined. An evaluation is now being 
done to determine whether the project is eligible to enter into 
Final Design. Total capital costs are currently estimated at 
$476,000,000 (escalated dollars), including a requested 
$245,500,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds. Through fiscal 
year 2002, Congress has appropriated $7,890,000 in section 5309 
New Starts funds to the project. The Committee has recommended 
$4,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    Cleveland, Ohio, Euclid Corridor Transportation Project 
(ECTP).--The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority 
(GCRTA) is proposing to implement a 9.8-mile transit corridor 
incorporating exclusive bus rapid transit lanes and related 
capital improvements on Euclid Avenue from Public Square in 
downtown Cleveland east to University Circle. The proposed 
project is known as the Euclid Corridor Transportation Project 
(ECTP). The ECTP incorporates a series of transit improvements 
including an exclusive center median busway along Euclid Avenue 
from Public Square to University Circle area and continue into 
the city of East Cleveland, terminating at the Stokes/
Windermere rapid transit station. GCRTA proposes to operate 60-
foot articulated electric trolley buses (ETB) with both left 
and right-hand side doors for access and egress of patrons on 
the corridor. The ETBs will have access to the entire length of 
the proposed corridor. However, conventional buses will not be 
able to access Euclid Avenue in the central business district. 
GCRTA estimates that 29,500 average weekday boardings, 
including 2,400 daily new riders, will use the ECTP in the year 
2025. Section 3035 of ISTEA authorized FTA to enter into a 
multiyear grant agreement for development of the Dual Hub 
Corridor. In November 1995, the GCRTA Board of Trustees 
selected the ETCP as the locally preferred alternative (LPA), 
which included a busway and the rehabilitation and relocation 
of several existing rapid rail stations. In December 1995, the 
Northeast Ohio areawide coordinating agency (local metropolitan 
planning organization) adopted a resolution supporting the 
ECTP. In mid-1999, GCRTA reconfigured the scope of the ECTP to 
incorporate only the construction of a busway along Euclid 
Avenue. The rapid rail elements have been eliminated from the 
ECTP proposal for section 5309 New Starts funding. The 
environmental review process was completed in September 2001. A 
Finding of No Significant Impact was determined. FTA approved 
the ECTP into final design. Total capital costs for the ECTP 
are estimated at $228,600,000 (escalated dollars), of which 
Cleveland is expected to seek $135,000,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funding for the project (59 percent). Through fiscal 
year 2002, Congress has appropriated $19,390,000 in section 
5309 New Starts funds for the Euclid corridor transportation 
project. Of this amount, Congress reprogrammed $4,720,000 to 
other projects. The Committee has recommended $6,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Dallas, Texas, North Central LRT extension project.--Dallas 
Area Rapid Transit (DART) is constructing a 12.5-mile, 9-
station extension of its light rail system from the Park Lane 
Station north to the City of Plano. DART estimates that 
approximately 17,000 riders will use this extension by 2020, of 
which 6,800 will be new riders. The total cost of this project 
is estimated at $517,200,000. DART began contracting for 
construction and purchasing vehicles and necessary right-of-way 
in May 1998, and expects to open the North Central extension 
for revenue service in December 2003. The North Central 
extension is authorized for final design and construction under 
section 3030(a)(20) of TEA21. FTA issued an FFGA for this 
project on October 6, 1999, which will provide a total of 
$333,000,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. Through fiscal 
year 2002, a total of $230,910,000 has been provided to this 
project. The Committee has recommended $60,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Denver, Colorado, Southeast Corridor LRT project.--The 
Regional Transportation District (RTD) in Denver and the 
Colorado Department of Transportation (CDOT) are implementing a 
19.12-mile, 13-station light rail line between downtown Denver 
and Lincoln Avenue in Douglas County along I-25, with a spur 
along I-225 to Parker Road in Arapahoe County. Formerly 
referred to as the Southeast Corridor, it is now known locally 
as the Transportation Expansion Project (TREX). The double-
tracked line would operate over an exclusive right-of-way and 
connects with both the existing Central Corridor light rail 
line in downtown Denver, and the Southwest line which was 
completed and opened for revenue operation in July 2000. The 
total capital cost of this project is estimated at 
$879,274,000. Revenue service is now projected to begin by 
October 2006, 18 months earlier than anticipated. Section 
3030(a)(23) of TEA21 authorized the Southeast LRT in Denver for 
final design and construction. FTA issued an FFGA for this 
project on November 17, 2000, which will provide a total of 
$525,000,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. A total of 
$60,860,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds has been 
appropriated for this project through fiscal year 2002. The 
Committee has recommended $70,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Ft. Lauderdale, Florida, Tri-Rail Commuter Rail Upgrade.--
The Tri-County Commuter Rail Authority (Tri-Rail) is proposing 
a number of system improvements to the 71.7-mile regional 
transportation system it operates between Palm Beach, Broward 
and Dade Counties in South Florida. This area has a population 
of over 4 million, nearly one-third of the total population of 
Florida. The planned improvements include construction of a 
second mainline track, rehabilitation of the signal system, 
station and parking improvements, acquisition of new rolling 
stock, improvements to the Hialeah Maintenance Yard facility, 
and construction of a new, northern layover facility. The 
proposed double-tracking will improve service by a factor of 
three, permitting 20-minute intervals between trains during 
peak commuter hours instead of the current 1-hour headways. 
Tri-Rail estimates that these improvements will serve 42,100 
average daily boardings by 2015, including 10,200 daily new 
riders. On May 16, 2000, FTA issued an FFGA for Segment 5 of 
the Double Track Corridor Improvement Program, which includes 
construction of 44.3 miles of the second mainline track and 
upgrades to the existing grade crossing system along the entire 
71.7-mile South Florida Rail Corridor. It is expected to open 
for revenue service on March 21, 2005. The first four segments, 
upgrading the Hialeah Maintenance Yard and replacing the New 
River Bridge, while part of the overall Double Track Corridor 
Improvement Program, are not included in the scope of this 
project. Total capital costs for the Segment 5 project are 
estimated at $327,000,000. The FFGA for the Double Track 
Corridor Improvement Program Segment 5 Project will provide a 
total of $110,500,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. 
Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $52,400,000 
for this project. This project has been authorized in TEA21. 
The Committee has recommended $25,000,000 in New Starts funding 
for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Houston, Texas, Metro advanced transit plan project.--The 
Advanced Transit Program (ATP) is Houston METRO's plan for 
advanced high capacity transit in its 1,285 square mile service 
area. The first component to begin operation will be the 
locally funded 7.5-mile METRO Rail light rail project from 
downtown to Reliant Park. The next projects will flow from 
ongoing implementation of the METRO Mobility 2025. Adopted by 
the Board of Directors in May 2001, this is METRO's long-range 
transit plan for the region. The next steps in the ATP will be 
studies in the corridors designated for consideration of 
advanced high capacity transit. The four highest priority 
corridors will be subject to detailed alternatives analysis 
studies, defining mode and general alignment of the proposed 
advanced high capacity transit improvements. As a result of 
those studies, preferred alternatives for each corridor will be 
adopted and moved forward to implementation. By 2025, the ATP 
will have introduced advanced high capacity into many of the 
region's major travel corridors. The specific mode will be 
tailored to meet individual corridor travel needs while 
maintaining system connectivity. This project has been 
authorized in TEA21. The Committee has recommended $23,400,000 
in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Johnson County, Kansas, commuter rail project engineering 
and design.--Johnson County, Kansas is proposing to implement a 
5 station, 23-mile Commuter Rail line extending from downtown 
Kansas City, Missouri, southwest to Olathe, Kansas, in Johnson 
County. The proposed commuter rail project would parallel 
Interstate 35, the major highway connecting Kansas City with 
Olathe, and would share existing Burlington Northern and Santa 
Fe (BNSF) railroad track (except for the line's northern-most 
mile segment, which would require either new track or existing 
Kansas City Terminal Railway trackage). Park and ride 
facilities are being planned for each proposed station. The 
commuter rail line will terminate in Kansas City at its 
historic Union Station. Ridership estimates for the I-35 
commuter rail project range from 1,400 to 3,800 trips per day. 
These estimates will be refined during subsequent phases of 
project development. TEA21 section 5309(e)(8)(A) applies to 
this project. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
appropriated $4,450,000 for this project. The Committee has 
recommended $400,000 in New Starts funding for this project in 
fiscal year 2003.
    Largo, Maryland, Metrorail, extension project.--The 
Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (WMATA) is 
constructing a 3.1-mile heavy rail extension of the Metrorail 
blue line. The Largo Metrorail Extension will be from the 
existing Addison Road Station to Largo town center, located 
just beyond the Capital beltway in Prince George's County, 
Maryland. The project follows an alignment that has been 
preserved as a rail transit corridor in the Prince Georges's 
County master plan. The 3.1-mile alignment will contain at-, 
above-, and below-grade segments. Two new stations will be 
provided at Summerfield and at the Largo town center station. 
The stations will provide 500 and 2,200 park-and-ride spaces 
and 11 bus bays each. A number of local bus routes will connect 
to the two new stations; shuttle bus service is proposed 
between both stations and the FedEx Field, a major sports 
complex planned for entertainment and retail uses. Maryland 
Transit Administration (MTA) will manage the project through 
preliminary engineering, with WMATA undertaking final design 
and construction. The project is anticipated to open for 
service by December 2004, with a total capital cost estimated 
at $433,900,000. In December 2000, FTA entered into an FFGA 
with WMATA that commits a total of $260,300,000 in section 5309 
New Starts funds to this project. Through fiscal year 2002, 
Congress has appropriated $67,530,000 to this project. This 
project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee has 
recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Las Vegas/Resort Corridor.--The Las Vegas Regional 
Transportation Commission (RTC) is in the process of conducting 
preliminary engineering on the proposed 3.1-mile Resort 
Corridor Automated Guideway Transit (elevated monorail) 
project. The monorail will serve the Las Vegas central business 
district and the northern part of the resort corridor along the 
Las Vegas ``strip'' from Freemont Avenue to Sahara Avenue. The 
Resort Corridor represents the region's largest primary 
employment center, as about 50 percent of the regional jobs 
(206,000) are located in this corridor. There are an estimated 
69,300 jobs and 21,800 residents within a one-half mile from 
the proposed monorail boarding points. The RTC estimates the 
proposed system will carry approximately 58,500 weekday 
boardings, including 19,880 daily new riders in 2020. Based in 
the 1990 census data, there are an estimated 1,690 low-income 
households within a one-half mile radius of the proposed six 
stations. Revenue operations are scheduled to begin in January 
2004. This project represents an extension to a 4-mile fully 
automated monorail that is currently under construction by the 
Las Vegas Monorail Company (LVMC). The estimated capital cost 
for the 3.1-mile Resort Corridor monorail project is estimated 
to be $440,000,000, of which the RTC is seeking $130,000,000, 
or 30 percent, in New Starts funding. Through fiscal year 2002, 
Congress has appropriated $13,880,000 for this project. The 
Committee is recommending $10,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Little Rock, Arkansas, river rail project.--The Central 
Arkansas Transit Authority (CATA) is planning the 
implementation of a vintage streetcar circulator system on 
existing right-of-way connecting the Alltel Arena, the River 
Market, and the Convention Center in downtown Little Rock to 
the communities of North Little Rock and Pulaski County. CATA 
proposes that service be provided by seven replica streetcars 
operating on a single track powered by overhead catenary. The 
proposed system includes a 2.1-mile alignment, purchase of 
vehicles, and construction of a maintenance facility. Ridership 
projections estimate 1,000 to 1,200 average weekday boardings 
with an additional 1,000 to 1,800 riders on special event days. 
A future 0.4-mile extension to the William Jefferson Clinton 
Presidential Library site has been proposed. Revenue service is 
planned to begin in December 2002. This project is addressed in 
the TEA21 section 5309(e)(8)(A). The Committee has appropriated 
$7,930,000 in New Starts funding for this project through 
fiscal year 2002 and has recommended $4,000,000 in New Starts 
funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Long Island Rail Road, New York, East Side access 
project.--The New York Metropolitan Transit Authority (MTA) is 
currently in final design on a proposed direct access for Long 
Island Rail Road (LIRR) passengers to a new passenger concourse 
in Grand Central Terminal (GCT) in east Midtown Manhattan. The 
proposed 4-mile, 2 station, commuter rail extension under the 
East River, using an existing rail tunnel, is anticipated to 
alleviate LIRR tunnel capacity constraints and enable the 
overall growth of the Nation's largest commuter rail system. 
The project would provide access to the eastern part of midtown 
Manhattan for users of the LIRR who now must get to east 
midtown by subway or walking from Penn Station. By allowing 
some LIRR passengers to use GCT, the project would also free up 
capacity at Penn Station for New Jersey Transit and Amtrak 
trains. The LIRR ESA project would serve one of the strongest 
transit market in the country. By the year 2020, MTA/LIRR 
projects that the LIRR ESA project will serve approximately 
167,000 average weekday boardings including 15,400 daily new 
riders. Based on 1990 census data, MTA/LIRR estimates that 
there are approximately 4,443 low-income households within a 
one-half mile radius of proposed station areas. MTA/LIRR 
estimates that the LIRR ESA project would yield 7.4 million 
hours of travel-time savings. MTA estimates that the LIRR ESA 
would serve approximately 698,200 jobs that are located within 
a one-half mile radius of the proposed station areas. The 
project is scheduled for completion by December 2012 at a 
projected cost of $4,350,000,000. MTA is proposing a request 
for $2,170,000,000 (50 percent share) in New Starts funding. In 
fiscal year 2002, Congress appropriated $14,600,000 in section 
5309 New Starts funds for the continued development of the LIRR 
ESA project. The Committee has recommended $15,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Los Angeles, California, East Side corridor light rail 
transit project.--The Los Angeles County Metropolitan 
Transportation Authority (MTA) is proposing to implement a 5.9-
mile light rail transit (LRT) line in the Eastside Corridor, 
connecting Downtown Los Angeles with low-to moderate-income 
communities in East Los Angeles. The proposed system would 
include 8 stations and will traverse eastward from Union 
Station (the city's major intermodal hub, serving intercity, 
commuter, and regional rail service, as well as local and 
express bus services) along Alameda Street through the City 
Terrace, Belvedere, and East Los Angeles communities of 
unincorporated Los Angeles County. The project would terminate 
at Beverly and Atlantic Boulevards, where a 500-space park-and-
ride facility is planned. The project is primarily at-grade, 
with a 1.8-mile mid-section underground in tunnel. The project 
is intended to improve mobility for residents and employees in 
the corridor, and provide improved access to employment 
opportunities throughout the MTA service area. 15,000 average 
weekday boardings are forecasted on the proposed line in 2020, 
including 9,700 daily new riders. The project is estimated to 
cost $818,000,000 in escalated dollars, with a section 5309 New 
Starts share of $491,000,000. This project has been authorized 
in TEA21. The Committee has recommended $10,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Los Angeles, California, North Hollywood extension 
project.--The Los Angeles Metro Rail Red Line rapid-rail system 
is being planned, programmed and constructed in phases, through 
a series of ``Minimum Operable Segments'' (MOSs). The first of 
these segments (MOS 1), a 4.4-mile, 5-station segment, opened 
for revenue service in January 1993. A 2.1-mile, 3-station 
segment of MOS 2 opened along Wilshire Boulevard in July 1996; 
an additional 4.6-mile, 5-station segment of MOS 2 opened in 
June 1999, and the Federal funding commitment has been 
fulfilled. On May 14, 1993, an FFGA was issued to the Los 
Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (LACMTA) 
for the third construction phase, MOS 3. MOS 3 was defined 
under ISTEA (section 3034) to include three segments: the North 
Hollywood segment, a 6.3-mile, 3-station subway extension of 
the Hollywood branch of MOS 2 to North Hollywood through the 
Santa Monica mountains; the Mid-City segment, a 2.3-mile, 2-
station western extension of the Wilshire Boulevard branch; and 
an undefined segment of the Eastside project, to the east from 
the existing Red Line terminus at Union Station. LACMTA later 
defined this eastern segment as a 3.7-mile, 4-station extension 
under the Los Angeles River to First and Leona in East Los 
Angeles. On December 28, 1994, the FFGA for MOS 3 was amended 
to include this definition of the eastern segment, bringing the 
total commitment of Federal New Starts funds for MOS 3 to 
$1,416,490,000. In January 1997, FTA requested that LACMTA 
submit a recovery plan to demonstrate its ability to complete 
MOS 2 and MOS 3, while maintaining and operating the existing 
bus system. On January 14, 1998, the LACMTA Board of Directors 
voted to suspend and demobilize construction on all rail 
projects other than MOS 2 and the MOS 3 North Hollywood 
Extension. The MTA submitted a recovery plan to FTA on May 15, 
1998, which was approved by FTA on July 2, 1998. In 1998, 
LACMTA undertook a Regional Transportation Alternatives 
Analysis (RTAA) to analyze and evaluate feasible alternatives 
for the Eastside and Mid-City corridors. The RTAA addressed 
system investment priorities, allocation of resources to 
operate existing transit services at a reliable standard, 
assessment and management of financial risk, countywide bus 
service expansion, and a process for finalizing corridor 
investments. On November 9, 1998, the LACMTA Board reviewed the 
RTAA and directed staff to reprogram resources previously 
allocated to the Eastside and Mid-City Extensions to the 
implementation of RTAA recommendations, including the LACMTA 
Accelerated Bus Procurement Plan. LACMTA continued to study 
transit investment options for the Eastside and Mid-City 
corridors. In October 2000, FTA approved entry into preliminary 
engineering for a 5.9-mile, 8-station light rail line in the 
Eastside Corridor between downtown Los Angeles and East Los 
Angeles. The Mid-City corridor is still undergoing alternatives 
analysis. FTA will consider the prior Federal commitment under 
the MOS 3 FFGA as an ``other factor'' for rating and evaluation 
purposes for these projects, as long as the identified projects 
otherwise meet the requirements of the New Starts program. On 
June 9, 1997, FTA and LACMTA negotiated a revised FFGA covering 
the North Hollywood segment (Phase 1-A) of MOS 3, which opened 
in June 2000. The total capital cost of the North Hollywood 
project is estimated at $1,310,820,000 of which the revised 
FFGA commits $681,040,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds. 
Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $640,550,000 has been 
appropriated for the North Hollywood segment of MOS 3. This 
project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee has 
recommended $40,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Maryland, MARC commuter rail improvement projects.--The 
Maryland Mass Transit Administration is proposing three 
projects for the Maryland Commuter Rail (MARC) system serving 
the Baltimore, MD and Washington, DC metropolitan areas. These 
projects are (1) Mid-Day Storage Facility, (2) Penn-Camden 
Connection, and (3) Silver Spring Intermodal Transit Center. 
The proposed Mid-Day Storage Facility would be used for daytime 
equipment layover, minor repair, daily servicing and 
inspections of commuter rail train sets within the Amtrak Yard 
at Washington, DC's Union Station. Platforms that are currently 
used to store these trains at Union Station will no longer be 
available following the introduction of high-speed Amtrak 
service, and the new facility will avoid the operating cost of 
sending trains back to Baltimore for mid-day storage. MTA will 
lease the 5-acre site owned by Amtrak. Estimated capital costs 
for the Mid-Day Storage Facility project totals $26,600,000. 
The Penn-Camden Connection is a 6-mile connection between the 
MARC Camden Line and MARC Penn Line/Amtrak Northeast Corridor 
in southwest Baltimore. The connection of these two commuter 
rail lines is designed to achieve many benefits: the 
opportunity to remove trains from the congested Camden line for 
reverse peak movements; access to the planned MARC Maintenance 
Facility to be located along the connection; and, increased 
operating flexibility on both commuter rail lines, allowing 
redirection of MARC service during periods of CSX freight 
operations. Estimated capital costs for the Penn-Camden 
Connection project totals $33,300,000. The proposed Silver 
Spring Intermodal Transit Center, located in suburban 
Washington, DC, will construct an intermodal transit facility 
that relocates the Silver Spring MARC Station to the Silver 
Spring Metrorail station. The transit center would allow 
convenient passenger transfers between several modes of travel, 
including commuter rail, heavy rail, commuter and local bus 
service, taxi, bicycle, auto, and pedestrians. The center will 
also accommodate the proposed Georgetown Branch Trolley to 
operate between Silver Spring and Bethesda. Located in the 
Silver Spring, MD central business district, a major transit 
hub for lower Montgomery County, the intermodal transit center 
will more efficiently meet existing and future transit needs of 
this area. Estimated capital costs for the Silver Spring 
Intermodal Transit Center project totals $33,300,000. Section 
3030(g)(2) of TEA21 authorizes these projects as part of the 
Frederick extension, and will permit service improvements 
necessary to take full advantage of that extension. The 
proposed share of Federal funding from the section 5309 New 
Starts program is less than $25,000,000 for each of the 
individual improvements, which renders them exempt from 
evaluation. The Committee has recommended $14,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Memphis, Tennessee Medical Center Extension project.--The 
Memphis Area Transit Authority (MATA), in cooperation with the 
City of Memphis, is proposing to build a 2-mile light rail 
extension to the Main Street Trolley/Riverfront Loop village 
rail system. The extension would expand service from the 
central business district (CBD) east to the Medical Center 
area. The line would operate on city streets in mixed traffic 
and would connect with the Main Street Trolley, sharing a lane 
with automobile traffic on Madison Avenue between Main Street 
and Cleveland Street. Six new stations would be located along 
the route. The line will be designed to accommodate light rail 
vehicles, but vintage rail cars would be used until a proposed 
regional LRT line is implemented and a fleet of modern LRT 
vehicles is acquired. The total capital cost of this project is 
estimated at $74,580,000. This project would be the last 
segment of the downtown rail circulation system as well as the 
first segment of a regional light rail line. This project is 
included in the City of Memphis' Capital Improvement Program, 
the Memphis MPO Transportation Improvement Program, and the 
State Transportation Improvement Program. A Major Investment 
Study/Environmental Assessment was completed in May 1997, 
fulfilling the statutory requirement for an alternatives 
analysis. FTA approved this project for entry into final design 
in May 2000. The Memphis Corridor was authorized for final 
design and construction by section 3030(a)(43) of TEA21. On 
December 12, 2000 FTA issued an FFGA committing a total of 
$59,670,000 in section 5309 new start funds to the Medical 
Center Extension. A total of $35,310,000 has been appropriated 
for this project through fiscal year 2002. The Committee has 
recommended $10,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Twin Cities/Hiawatha Corridor LRT and Northstar Corridor 
Projects.--Metro Transit and the Metropolitan Council of 
Minneapolis (the local metropolitan planning organization), in 
cooperation with the Minnesota Department of Transportation 
(MnDOT), Hennepin County, and the Metropolitan Airports 
Commission (MAC), are constructing an 11.6-mile, 17-station 
light rail line linking downtown Minneapolis, the Minneapolis-
St. Paul International Airport, and the Mall of America in 
Bloomington. The line would operate along the corridor 
following Hiawatha Avenue and Trunk Highway 55. The line begins 
in the central business district and travels south on the 
existing transit mall along 5th Street, follows the former Soo 
Line Railroad from the Metrodome to Franklin Avenue, and then 
runs parallel with Hiawatha Avenue towards the airport. The 
line will tunnel under the runways and taxiways for 1.8 miles, 
with 1 station, emerge on the west side of the airport, and 
continue south to the vicinity of the Mall of America in 
Bloomington. The project is expected to serve 24,800 average 
weekday boardings by the year 2020; 19,300 average weekday 
boardings are projected in the opening year. Revenue service is 
scheduled to commence in December 2004. The total capital cost 
of the Hiawatha Corridor LRT is estimated at $675,400,000. 
Section 3030(a)(91) of TEA21 authorizes the ``Twin Cities--
Transitway Corridors'' for final design and construction. In 
January 2001, FTA issued an FFGA that commits a total of 
$334,300,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds to the Hiawatha 
Corridor LRT. Of this amount, $168,350,000 has been provided 
through fiscal year 2002. The Minnesota Department of 
Transportation (MNDOT) is currently undertaking preliminary 
engineering on a proposal to design and construct an 82-mile 
commuter rail line within the Northstar Corridor that extends 
from downtown Minneapolis northwest to Rice, Minnesota. The 
Northstar Corridor project also includes the construction of a 
1,750-foot light rail transit extension of the Hiawatha 
Corridor LRT project currently under construction. The proposed 
commuter rail project would serve one of the fast growing 
regions of the State. Ridership on the proposed commuter rail 
line is expected to be 10,800 average weekday boardings, 
including 5,400 daily new riders. Based on 1990 census data, 
the MNDOT estimates that there are approximately 1,100 low-
income households within a one-half mile radius of the proposed 
11 stations. In the forecast year 2020, MNDOT estimates that 
the proposed commuter rail would yield approximately 0.4 
million hours of travel-time savings. In addition, The proposed 
project would serve approximately 35,700 jobs located within a 
one-half mile radius of the proposed station areas, 
encompassing the Minneapolis, St. Cloud and Rice central 
business districts. During the Spring 2002 legislative session, 
the Minnesota State legislature was not able to reach a 
consensus on the provision of the State's share of the 
project's total estimated capital cost. The State was to 
provide approximately $120,000,000. Total capital costs for 
this project are estimated to be $294,000,000 including 
$147,000,000 in requested section 5309 New Starts funding. 
Congress provided $9,900,000 to this project in fiscal year 
2002. This project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee 
has recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding for the 
Hiawatha Corridor LRT and the Northstar Corridor Projects in 
fiscal year 2003.
    Nashua, New Hampshire-Lowell, Massachusetts, commuter rail 
project.--The New Hampshire Department of Transportation is 
planning on constructing an 11-mile commuter rail extension 
project. The rail line would connect Lowell, Massachusetts and 
Nashua, New Hampshire. The project includes the rehabilitation 
of track and appurtenances, construction of new track where 
necessary, as well as construction of a park-and-ride lot with 
a boarding platform. The new service extension will provide an 
alternative to a highly congested highway corridor. This 
project received funding through the TEA21 authorization as 
well as through other appropriations. Through fiscal year 2002, 
the Committee has appropriated $5,930,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2002. The 
Committee has recommended $3,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Nashville, Tennessee, regional commuter rail project.--
Nashville's Regional Transportation Authority, the Metropolitan 
Planning Organization, and the Metropolitan Transit Authority 
have completed the preliminary engineering and environmental 
studies. The project is currently in final design. This project 
has been authorized in TEA21. Through fiscal year 2002, 
$11,870,000 has been appropriated for this project. The 
Committee has recommended $4,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen light rail transit project (MOS-
1).--The New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is 
constructing a 9.6-mile, Minimum Operable Segment (MOS) of an 
eventual 20.1-mile at-grade Hudson-Bergen Light Rail Transit 
System (HBLRTS) that will extend from the Vince Lombardi park-
and-ride lot in Bergen County to West Fifth Street in Bayonne 
in Hudson County, New Jersey. HBLRTS MOS-1 will connect the 
Hoboken Terminal to 34th Street in Bayonne and West Side Avenue 
in Jersey City. The core of the completed system will serve the 
high-density commercial centers in Jersey City and Hoboken, and 
provide connections with NJ Transit commuter rail service, PATH 
trains to Newark and Manhattan, and the Port Imperial ferry 
from Weehauken to Manhattan. This minimum operable segment 
(MOS) is being constructed under a turnkey contract to design, 
build, operate, and maintain the system, which was awarded in 
October 1996. Total costs are expected to be $992,140,000 for 
MOS-1; construction began in December 1996. In August 1996, FTA 
and NJ TRANSIT executed a FFGA, committing $604,090,000 in 
section 5309 New Starts funding for HBLRTS MOS-1. NJ TRANSIT is 
currently providing initial revenue service on HBLRTS MOS-1 
from Pavonia-Newport to West Side Avenue and East 34th Street. 
Construction on HBLRTS MOS-1 is approximately 85 percent 
complete. Full revenue service is scheduled to commence in 
September 2002. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of 
$584,890,000 has been appropriated for this project. This 
project has been authorized in TEA21. The Committee has 
recommended $19,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    New Jersey/Hudson-Bergen light rail transit project (MOS-
2).--The second Minimum Operable Segment (MOS-2) of the NJ 
Transit Hudson-Bergen LRT system is a 5.1-mile, 7-station 
segment running north from Hoboken Terminal to the Tonnelle 
Avenue park-and-ride lot in North Bergen, and south to 22nd 
Street in Bayonne. The Hudson-Bergen MOS-2 line will serve an 
area with one of the highest residential densities in the 
region, and the downtown Jersey City area contains the largest 
concentration of office development in Hudson County. By 
providing connections to ferry and commuter rail service, the 
line will also serve the Manhattan central business district. 
MOS-2 is scheduled for completion in 2005 and is anticipated to 
carry 34,900 average weekday boardings in 2010. Total costs for 
MOS-2 are estimated at $1,215,400,000. FTA issued an FFGA for 
this project on October 31, 2000, committing a total of 
$500,000,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds. The MOS-2 
project does not require funding from the section 5309 New 
Starts program until fiscal year 2003; the issuance of the FFGA 
at this point provided NJ Transit with the authority to borrow 
funds to begin construction while the MOS-1 is being completed, 
under the same turnkey contract. This permits the entire 
Hudson-Bergen project to be constructed at a lower cost by 
avoiding the significant costs associated with stopping and 
then restarting a major construction project. No prior year 
funding has been appropriated for MOS-2 from the section 5309 
New Starts program. This project has been authorized in TEA21. 
The Committee has recommended $40,000,000 in New Starts funding 
for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Newark, New Jersey--Newark Rail Link (MOS-1) Project.--The 
New Jersey Transit Corporation (NJ Transit) is constructing a 
1-mile, 5-station initial Minimum Operable Segment (MOS-1) of a 
proposed 8.8-mile, 16-station light rail transit (LRT) system 
between Newark and downtown Elizabeth, New Jersey. MOS-1) will 
function as an extension of the existing 4.3-mile Newark City 
Subway light rail line, running from Board Street in Newark to 
Newark's Penn Station. In August 2000, FTA and NJ TRANSIT 
executed a FFGA committing $141,950,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funds. NJ transit is preparing a Supplemental Draft 
Environmental Impact Statement (SDEIS) to analyze the effects 
of an alignment modification on the segment contained within 
the City of Elizabeth (NERL MOS-3) to support extensive 
commercial and retail development that has been initiated since 
the completion of the original 1997 DEIS for the full 8.8-mile 
NERL project. The total cost of the MOS-1 segment is estimated 
at $207,700,000 (escalated dollars). Section 3030(a)(57) of 
TEA21 authorized the New Jersey Urban Core Project, which 
consists of eight separate elements including the Newark-
Elizabeth Rail Link, for final design and construction. On 
August 2, 2000 FTA issued an FFGA committing a total of 
$141,950,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds to the Newark 
Rail Link MOS 1 project. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
appropriated a total of $59,390,000 for this project. An 
additional $9,910,000 was provided in fiscal year 2001. The 
Committee has recommended $60,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    New Orleans, Louisiana, Canal Streetcar project.--The New 
Orleans Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is developing a 5.5-
mile streetcar project in the downtown area, along the median 
of Canal Street. The Canal Streetcar spine will extend from the 
Canal Ferry at the Mississippi River in the central business 
district, through the Mid-City neighborhood to Carrollton 
Avenue, where one branch will continue on Canal Street to the 
Cemeteries and another will follow Carrollton Avenue to City 
Park/Beauregard Circle. The corridor is located in an existing, 
built-up area that was originally developed in the streetcar 
era. Much of the corridor lies within the central business 
district and historic areas, where employment and housing 
densities, mix of uses, and pedestrian-oriented development are 
generally good. The central business district includes a high-
density mix of office, retail, hotels and leisure attractions. 
The total capital cost of this project is estimated at 
$161,300,000, of which RTA is seeking $129,050,000 (80 percent) 
in section 5309 New Starts funding, as recommended by FTA. 
Final design is essentially complete, contracts for vehicle 
assembly have been awarded, and construction contracts are 
pending award. FTA awaits completion of the congressional 
review of the proposed FFGA. Section 3030(a)(51) of TEA21 
authorizes the New Orleans Canal Streetcar Project for final 
design and construction. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has 
appropriated a total of $70,030,000 for this project. The 
Committee has recommended $30,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Pawtucket, Rhode Island, commuter rail and maintenance 
facility project.--The existing Massachusetts Bay Transit 
Authority layover/storage yard at East Junction, located in the 
heavily residential area in Attleboro, needs to be relocated to 
a 9-acre parcel located in the northwest quadrant of I 95 and 
Smithfield Avenue in Pawtucket. A six-track yard with light 
servicing capabilities will be constructed initially. The yard 
will be designed to accommodate eight tracks and an electrified 
maintenance facility in the future. The Federal share of the 
project is $14,700,000 (50 percent), consisting of $10,000,000 
in section 5309 New Starts funding and $4,700,000 in Fixed 
Guideway Modernization funding, the rest of the project is 
being funded through the Rhode Island Department of 
Transportation (RIDOT) and the Massachusetts Bay Transit 
Authority. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
$5,450,000 in section 5309 in the FTA New Start funds. The 
Committee has recommended $4,500,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, Schuylkill Valley Metro 
Project.--The Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation 
Authority (SEPTA) and the Berks Area Reading Transportation 
Authority (BARTA) propose to develop the Schuylkill Valley 
Metro Rail project. The proposed project extends approximately 
74 miles from Philadelphia to Reading and parallels the 
following major congested roadways: Schuylkill Expressway 
(Interstate 76), US 422 Expressway and US Route 202. The 
corridor includes the smaller cities of Norristown, Pottstown 
and Phoenixville. The corridor also includes suburban centers 
of King of Prussia and Great Valley, as well as regional 
activity centers and attractions including Center City 
Philadelphia, Art Museum, Philadelphia Zoo, King of Prussia 
Malls, Valley Forge National Park and Reading outlets. The 
corridor encompasses three transit authorities: SEPTA, BARTA 
and Pottstown Urban Transit (PUT) and two metropolitan planning 
regions: Delaware Valley and Berks County. Commuter rail 
service currently operates in the eastern portion of the 
corridor with rail freight service operations in the western 
portion of the corridor. SEPTA and BARTA have selected a 
locally preferred alternative (LPA) that would employ rail 
vehicle suitable for operation on mixed-use (passenger or 
freight) track, capable of one-man operation and with 15 and 
30-minute headways in the peak and off peak, respectively. 
Total capital cost for the project is estimated at 
$1,831,700,000. The DEIS was published in December 2001. FTA 
approved entry into PE in January 2002. Through fiscal year 
2002, Congress has provided $25,720,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funds for the proposed project. The Committee has 
recommended $15,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, North Shore Connector light rail 
transit project.--The Port Authority of Allegheny County (PAAC) 
proposes to construct a 1.6-mile light rail transit system 
extension connecting the Golden Triangle and the North Shore 
wholly within downtown Pittsburgh. The project would extend the 
existing LRT service from the Gateway center LRT station and 
the Convention Center. The North Shore Connector LRT project 
involves the construction of four new stations and 
modifications of the Gateway Center and Steel Plaza stations, 
and the acquisition of 10 new light rail vehicles. FTA approval 
to initiate preliminary engineering was granted in January 
2001. Project capital costs are estimated at $389,900,000 
(escalated); revenue service start-up is planned in 2006. 
Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $23,670,000 
in section 5309 New Starts funds (50 percent) for this effort. 
The Committee has recommended $4,000,000 in New Starts funding 
for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania Stage II LRT Reconstruction 
project.--The Port Authority of Allegheny County (``Port 
Authority'') is reconstructing Pittsburgh's old 25-mile trolley 
lines to modern light rail standards. The reconstruction is 
taking place in two stages. The Stage I Light Rail Transit 
(LRT) project, undertaken in the 1980s, included reconstruction 
of the first segment and construction of Pittsburgh's first 
subway. Ground was broken on the Stage I LRT project in 
December 1980, and the reconstruction of this segment was 
completed in 1987. The Stage II LRT project includes 
reconstruction of the remaining 12 miles of the system, which 
consists of the Overbrook, Library and Drake trolley lines, to 
modern LRT standards. Single-track segments will be double-
tracked, the Overbook and Drake lines (which are currently 
closed) will be reopened, and 28 new light rail vehicles are 
being purchased. In order to prioritize program needs against 
financing requirements, Port Authority reconfigured its rail 
improvement program in 1999. As a result, the Stage II LRT 
project will itself be undertaken in segments. The revised 
Stage II LRT Priority Program includes reconstruction of 10.7 
miles on both the Overbrook Line and a portion of the Library 
Line, construction of 2,400 park-and-ride spaces, and the 
purchase of 28 light rail vehicles. The total capital cost of 
the Stage II Priority Program is estimated at $386,460,000. The 
remaining portions of the original Stage II LRT project will be 
undertaken as local funding becomes available. Section 
3030(a)(98) authorizes the ``Pittsburgh--Stage II Light Rail'' 
project for final design and construction. In January 2001, FTA 
issued an FFGA for this project that would commit a total of 
$100,200,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding. Through fiscal 
year 2002, a total of $41,530,000 has been appropriated in New 
Starts funds for this project, and an additional $96,500,000 
has been appropriated in section 5309 Fixed Guideway 
Modernization funds. The Committee has recommended $25,600,000 
in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Portland, Oregon Interstate MAX LRT Extension project.--The 
Tri-County Metropolitan Transit District of Oregon (Tri-Met) is 
constructing a 5.8-mile, 10-station extension of the 
Metropolitan Area Express (``MAX'') light rail system, which 
will connect Portland's central business district with the 
regional Exposition Center in north Portland. Riders will be 
able to transfer between the Interstate MAX extension and the 
existing 33-mile East/West MAX line at the Rose Quarter 
station. This line will complement regional land use plans by 
connecting established residential, commercial, entertainment 
and other major activity centers, and will provide a key 
transportation link in the region's welfare-to-work programs. 
The total cost of the Interstate MAX project is estimated at 
$350,000,000. Tri-Met estimates that the Interstate MAX 
extension will serve 18,100 average weekday boardings and 8,400 
daily new riders by 2020. On September 20, 2000, FTA and Tri-
Met entered into an FFGA that commits a total of $257,500,000 
in section 5309 New Starts funds to the Interstate MAX project. 
This does not include funding appropriated in prior years that 
were allocated to Portland Metro for the 12-mile South-North 
light rail line originally proposed for this corridor. The 
Committee has recommended $70,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003. Through fiscal year 2002, the 
Committee appropriated $76,750,000 in section 5309 New Starts 
funds for the Interstate MAX light rail extension. This figure 
includes $70,000,000 in prior years' section 5309 New Starts 
funds that are not included in the FFGA commitment.
    Puget Sound, Washington, Sounder Commuter Rail project.--
Sound Transit, the Central Puget Sound Regional Transit 
Authority, is implementing commuter rail service along the 82-
mile existing rail corridor between Lakewood and Everett, 
Washington. When the Sound Move enabling legislation is fully 
implemented, Sounder will serve 13 stations along the corridor, 
connecting commuters with local and regional bus service, the 
Washington State ferry system, Amtrak, the Central Link light 
rail system, and Tacoma Link. Currently, Sounder commuter rail 
is providing weekday service during peak hours at seven 
stations between downtown Tacoma and Seattle. Once in full 
operation, 18 trains will serve the Lakewood-Tacoma-Seattle 
Sounder segment, and 12 trains will serve the Everett-Seattle 
segment. By 2020, Sounder is estimated to carry 18,800 daily 
riders. To date, $79,320,000 has been appropriated for the 82-
mile corridor. The Committee has recommended $30,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Raleigh, North Carolina, triangle transit project.--The 
Phase I Regional Rail project is the first proposed segment of 
a three-phased regional transit plan for linking the three 
counties--Wake, Durham, and Orange--in the Triangle Region of 
North Carolina. In Phase I, the Triangle Transit Authority 
(TTA) intends to initiate regional rail service from Durham to 
downtown Raleigh and from downtown Raleigh to North Raleigh. 
TTA proposes to use Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) rail vehicles to 
serve the 16 stations proposed for the Phase I of the project. 
TTA has proposed that the Phase I Regional Rail Project will 
use the existing North Carolina Railroad and CSX rail corridors 
to connect Duke University, downtown Durham, Research Triangle 
Park, RDU Airport, Morrisville, Cary, North Carolina State 
University, downtown Raleigh, and North Raleigh. The proposed 
project is estimated to serve 31,700 average weekday boardings 
by the year 2025. The most recent capital cost estimate for 
Phase I is $754,700,000 (escalated dollars). The cost estimate 
includes final design, acquisition of right-of-way (ROW) and 
rail vehicles, station construction, park and ride lots, and 
construction of storage and maintenance facilities. The 
corridor proposed to be used by TTA for the project is shared 
among a number of railroads; thus, TTA is considering a number 
of track realignments to accommodate proposed inter-city and 
high-speed rail improvements. This project has been authorized 
in TEA21. Through fiscal year 2002, $50,550,000 has been 
appropriated for this project. The Committee has recommended 
$15,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    St. Louis, Missouri, Metrolink St. Clair Extension 
project.--The Bi-State Development Agency (Bi-State) is 
developing a 26-mile extension of the Metrolink light rail line 
from downtown East St. Louis, Illinois to the Mid-America 
Airport in St. Clair County. A 17.4-mile Minimum Operable 
Segment (MOS), extending from the current Metrolink terminal in 
downtown East St. Louis to Belleville Area College (now known 
as Southwest Illinois College), began revenue service in May 
2001. This segment consists of 8 stations, 7 park-and-ride 
lots, 20 new light rail vehicles, and a new maintenance 
facility in East St. Louis. The route makes extensive use of 
abandoned railroad rights-of-way. Right-of-way and real estate 
acquisition is proceeding as scheduled, and revenue service is 
scheduled to begin in 2001. The total capital cost of the St. 
Clair MOS is estimated at $339,200,000. On October 17, 1996, 
FTA and Bi-State entered into an FFGA that commits a total of 
$243,930,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding to complete the 
17.4-mile MOS to Southwest Illinois College, and provides for 
extending the system to Mid-America Airport should funding 
become available at a later date. The funding committed to the 
MOS does not include $8,490,000 in Federal New Starts funding 
provided prior to fiscal year 1996, which brings total Federal 
funding for this project to $252,410,000 under the New Starts 
program. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $240,560,000 has 
been appropriated for this project. The Committee has 
recommended $3,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project 
in fiscal year 2003.
    Salt Lake City, Utah, CBD to University LRT project.--The 
Utah Transit Authority (UTA) is implementing a 2.5-mile, 4-
station light rail line in eastern Salt Lake City, from the 
downtown area to Rice-Eccles Stadium on the University of Utah 
campus. The line would connect with the existing North/South 
line at Main Street and travel east along 400 South and 500 
South to the stadium. Light rail vehicles would operate on city 
streets and property owned by Salt Lake City, the Utah 
Department of Transportation, and the University. The line is 
intended to significantly improve access to jobs, educational 
opportunities, health care, and housing throughout the 400 
South corridor. The CBD to University line is scaled back from 
the originally proposed 10.9-mile West/East line from the 
airport to the university. Total capital costs are estimated at 
$118,500,000. FTA issued an FFGA for the CBD to University LRT 
project on August 17, 2000, committing a total of $84,600,000 
in section 5309 New Starts funds. This does not include 
$4,960,000 appropriated for the project in prior years, but not 
included in the FFGA scope. Through fiscal year 2002, 
$20,800,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds has been 
appropriated for this project. The Committee has recommended 
$69,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    Salt Lake City, Utah, North-South LRT.--The Utah Transit 
Authority (UTA) has completed construction of a 15-mile light 
rail transit (LRT) line from downtown Salt Lake City to the 
southern suburbs. The line opened for regular weekday service 
on December 6, 1999. The system operates on city streets 
downtown for 2 miles and then follows a lightly-used railroad 
alignment owned by UTA to the suburban community of Sandy for 
13 miles. This project is one component of the Interstate 15 
corridor improvement initiative, which includes reconstruction 
of a parallel segment of I-15. Though original ridership 
projections for the South LRT system estimated daily ridership 
at 14,000 daily passengers in 2000 and 23,000 passengers by 
2010, current ridership averages 19,000 weekday passengers. 
Total capital costs for this project were $312,490,000. For the 
2002 Winter Olympic and Paralympic Games, this project 
connected major hotels and local residential areas with the 
Olympic venues for figure skating, medal rounds for ice hockey, 
and the International Broadcast Center, and connects with bus 
service to venues for speed skating, curling, and the Nordic 
alpine events. On August 2, 1995, FTA issued an FFGA for this 
project that committed a total of $237,390,000 in Federal New 
Starts funding. This does not include $6,600,000 in prior year 
funds that were provided before the FFGA was issued, which 
brings the total amount of section 5309 New Starts funding to 
$243,990,000. A total of $236,678,000 has been appropriated 
through fiscal year 2002; a shortfall remains totaling 
$718,006. The Committee has recommended $1,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Salt Lake City, Utah, University Medical Center LRT 
extension project.--The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) provides 
light rail service on two lines: the has completed construction 
of a 15-mileNorth-South light rail transit (LRT) line from 
Sandy City to downtown Salt Lake City to the southern suburbs. 
The line opened for regular weekday service on December 6, 
1999. The system operates on city streets downtown (2 miles) 
and then follows a lightly used railroad alignment owned by UTA 
to the suburban community of Sandy (13 miles). The University 
light rail line operates on a A 2.5-mile alignment from 
downtown Salt Lake City to Rice-Eccles stadium located at the 
western edge of the University of Utah campus. The University 
Medical Center and associated facilities constitute one of 
Utah's largest traffic generation points. Significant ridership 
will be served by this project, which will add 3 stations and 
1.5 miles of track to the existing UTA LRT system, extending 
from Rice-Eccles stadium to the University Medical Center. 
Revenue operation date is projected for December 2004. FTA and 
UTA signed an FFGA in May 2002 for $53,600,000 in section 5309 
New Starts funds. The Committee has recommended $12,000,000 in 
New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Salt Lake City, Utah, Salt Lake City-Ogden-Provo Commuter 
Rail project.--The Wasatch Front Regional Council (WFRC) and 
the Moutainlands Association of Governments (MAG) the two 
metropolitan planning organizations that oversee transportation 
planning for more than 85 percent of the State of Utah's 
population, along with the Utah Transit Authority and the Utah 
Department of Transportation, have completed an Inter-Regional 
Corridor Alternatives Analysis study to evaluate transportation 
improvements in a 120-mile corridor from Brigham City to 
Payson. The corridor encompasses the Ogden, Salt Lake City and 
Provo/Orem urbanized areas. The study evaluates highway and 
transit alternatives in the corridor. WFRC and MAG completed a 
Long-Range Transit Analysis in 1998, identifying commuter rail 
as an effective means of serving the transportation demands in 
the corridor between Brigham City and Payson. A commuter rail 
line, with 12 stations, has been identified and evaluated and 
subsequently included in the region's Long Range Transportation 
Plan. Discussions are underway with the Union-Pacific Railroad 
concerning the acquisition of railroad right-of-way to 
implement commuter rail, light rail or other transportation 
improvements. Total capital costs are estimated at 
$587,000,000, with $272,000,000 for Ogden to Salt Lake City and 
$315,000,000 for Salt Lake City to Provo. Through fiscal year 
2002, Congress has appropriated $3,900,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funds for this effort. The Committee has recommended 
$6,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    San Diego, California, Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor 
project.--The North County Transit District (NCTD) in northern 
San Diego County, California is planning to convert an existing 
22-mile freight railroad corridor between Oceanside and 
Escondido into a rail transit line. The line would run east 
from the City of Oceanside through the cities of Vista and San 
Marcos and unincorporated portions of San Diego County, to the 
City of Escondido, using diesel multiple unit (DMU) rail 
vehicles. The alignment also includes 1.7 miles of new right-
of-way to serve the campus of California State University San 
Marcos (CSUSM). The line is located along the State Route 78 
corridor, the principal east-west corridor in the county. The 
complete 23.7-mile system will serve 15 stations, 4 of which 
would be located at existing transit centers. Passenger rail 
service would have exclusive use of the rail line during pre-
defined hours of operation. An Environmental Impact Report 
(EIR) for the Oceanside-Escondido project was certified in 
1990, and a separate EIR for the CSUSM alignment was certified 
in 1991. A major investment study was not required under the 
procedures in effect at the time, based on concurrence from 
FTA, FHWA, the San Diego Association of Governments, Caltrans, 
the City of San Marcos, and NCTD. Advance planning was 
completed in December 1995, and the Environmental Assessment/
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report was completed in early 
1997. FTA approved NCTD's request to enter final design in 
February 2000. The total capital cost for this project is 
estimated at $332,300,000, of which NCTD is seeking 
$152,100,000 (46 percent) in FTA Sec. 5309 New Starts funds. 
Ridership is estimated at 15,100 average weekday boardings in 
2015, of which 8,600 would be daily new riders. Revenue 
operations are scheduled to begin in January 2004. This project 
will help to alleviate the heavy congestion of northern San 
Diego County along the Route 78 corridor. The project will 
serve large intermodal transit centers in both Oceanside and 
Escondido, and the corridor between contains a dispersed mix of 
commercial, industrial, and single-and multiple-family 
residential developments. This project is rated ``medium-high'' 
for both finance and justification, earning an overall rating 
of ``highly recommended.'' Section 3030(a)(77) of TEA21 
authorized this project for final design and construction. 
Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $24,280,000 
in section 5309 New Starts funds for this project. FTA 
anticipates that NCTD will be ready for an FFGA for this 
project by fall fiscal year 2003. The Committee has recommended 
$20,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    San Diego, California, Mission Valley East LRT Extension 
project.--The Metropolitan Transit Development Board (MTDB) is 
constructing a 5.9-mile, 4-station light rail extension of its 
existing Blue Line, from east of Interstate 15 to the City of 
La Mesa, where it will connect to the existing Orange Line near 
Baltimore Drive. The Mission Valley East line will serve four 
new and two existing stations, and would include elevated, at-
grade, and tunnel portions. The project includes two park and 
ride lots and a new access road between Waring Road and the 
Grantville Station. The corridor runs parallel to Interstate 8 
in eastern San Diego and La Mesa, and is characterized by a mix 
of low- to moderate-density industrial, residential, and 
commercial uses, but includes several major activity centers 
such as San Diego State University, the Grossmont regional 
shopping center, Kaiser Hospital, the Alvarado Medical Center, 
and the Grantville employment area. Over 24,000 jobs and nearly 
10,000 residences are located within walking distance of the 
proposed stations, and existing zoning is generally supportive 
of transit. Total capital costs are estimated at $431,000,000. 
On June 22, 2000, FTA issued an FFGA committing a total of 
$329,960,000 in section 5309 New Starts funding to this 
project. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated 
$112,720,000 for this project. The Committee has recommended 
$65,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.
    San Francisco, California, BART Extension to SFO Airport 
project.--Bay Area Rapid Transit (BART) in San Francisco and 
the San Mateo County Transit District (SamTrans) are 
constructing an 8.7-mile, 4-station extension of the BART rapid 
transit system to serve San Francisco International Airport 
(SFO). The project consists of a 7.5-mile mainline extension 
from the existing BART station at Colma, through Colma, south 
San Francisco, and San Bruno, terminating at the Millbrae 
Avenue BART/CalTrain Station. An additional 1.2-mile spur from 
the main line north of Millbrae will take BART trains directly 
into the airport, to a station adjoining the new International 
Terminal. The San Francisco International Airport is a major 
partner in this project. All structures and facilities to be 
constructed on airport property, and installation of related 
equipment, are being funded, designed and constructed by the 
airport for BART. This project is also part of the FTA Turnkey 
Demonstration Program to determine if the design/build approach 
will reduce implementation time and cost. On July 24, 1997, the 
first contract was awarded for site preparation and utility 
relocation associated with this project. Bids for the main 
contract for construction of the line, trackwork and related 
systems were opened on November 25, 1997. On June 30, 1997, FTA 
entered into an FFGA for the BART SFO extension, committing a 
total of $750,000,000 in Federal New Starts funds to the 
project; total capital costs at that time were estimated at 
$1,054,000,000. The total cost has since increased to an 
estimated $1,510,200,000; a recent surge in local construction 
activity has resulted in higher than estimated costs for 
construction of this project. Per the terms of the FFGA, any 
cost increases are the responsibility of the local project 
sponsors. Thus, the original Federal commitment is unchanged at 
$750,000,000. Through fiscal year 2002, a total of $317,370,000 
has been appropriated for this project. This project has been 
authorized in TEA21. The Committee has recommended $100,000,000 
in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    San Juan/Tren Urbano.--The Puerto Rico Department of 
Transportation and Public Works (DTPW) is constructing a 10.7-
mile, 16-station rapid rail line between Bayamon Centro and the 
Sagrado Corazon area of Santurce in the San Juan metropolitan 
area. The system consists of a double-track line operating over 
at-grade and elevated rights-of-way with a short below-grade 
segment, and a maintenance facility. When complete, this system 
is expected to carry 113,300 riders per day by 2010. This 
project has been selected as one of FTA's turnkey demonstration 
projects, which incorporates contracts to design, build, 
operate, and maintain the system. During 1996 and 1997, seven 
contracts were awarded under the turnkey procurement. The total 
capital cost of this project is now estimated at 
$1,653,600,000. On March 13, 1996, FTA entered into an FFGA 
committing $307,410,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds to 
this project, out of a total project cost of $1,250,000,000. 
This did not include $4,960,000 in Federal New Starts funding 
provided prior to fiscal year 1996, which brings total Federal 
New Starts funding for this project to $312,370,000. This FFGA 
was amended in July 1999 to include 2 additional stations and 
10 additional railcars. This amendment included $141,000,000 in 
section 5307 funds and $259,900,000 in flexible funding; no 
additional section 5309 New Starts funds were committed. A 
total of $193,560,000 in section 5309 funds has been allocated 
to the Tren Urbano project through fiscal year 2002. The 
Committee has recommended $45,000,000 in New Starts funding for 
this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Scranton, Pennsylvania, rail service to New York City.--
Morris, Sussex, and Warren Counties, all located in New Jersey, 
in cooperation with the New Jersey TRANSIT Corporation (NJ 
TRANSIT) conducted a Major Investment Study/Environmental 
Assessment (MIS/EA) to examine the feasibility of re-
instituting rail service on the Lackawanna Cut-off Corridor 
between Scranton, Pennsylvania and Hoboken, New Jersey. In 
addition, in 1998, a planning study was undertaken by 
Lackawanna County, Pennsylvania to preliminarily define the 
State's portion of the project. Commuter rail was selected as 
the locally preferred alternative. The potential rail service 
would connect to the NJ TRANSIT Boonton Line at Port Morris in 
Roxbury, New Jersey. Trains would operate to Hoboken and 
connect to Midtown Direct trains traveling to New York's Penn 
Station. The proposed project would include track and signal 
improvements, new stations, parking facilities, train storage 
yard, and rail equipment acquisition. Information on mobility 
improvements, environmental benefits, cost effectiveness, 
operating efficiencies, transit-supportive land use and other 
factors are being developed. Through fiscal year 2002, Congress 
has appropriated $990,000 in section 5309 New Starts funds for 
this effort. These funds will be used for conceptual design and 
completion of the EA. The Committee has recommended $3,000,000 
in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Seattle, Sound Transit Central Link Light Rail.--The 
Committee takes note of the significant progress made by the 
Federal Transit Administration and Sound Transit in addressing 
the concerns about light rail developments in the Puget Sound 
region raised by the Department of Transportation Inspector 
General's Interim Report of April, 2001. Since that time, the 
FTA and regional leaders have worked to make necessary 
improvements in the project plans and in oversight of the 
project. Sound Transit's Board of Directors in November, 2001 
adopted a new initial segment for Central Link light rail. This 
14-mile line will run from downtown Seattle in the north to 
just north of Sea-Tac Airport. Sound Transit has implemented 
management improvements which have improved its cost estimation 
and financial management capabilities. The FTA has stepped-up 
its oversight of the project as well. The Committee understands 
that Sound Transit will request a FFGA for the same 
$500,000,000 granted in 2001, but will seek to apply it to the 
revised alignment. Through fiscal year 2003, Congress has 
appropriated $90,970,000 for the project. The Committee 
encourages the ongoing efforts of Sound Transit and the FTA and 
looks forward to continuing to work with the FTA and Sound 
Transit in addressing the Puget Sound region's significant 
transit needs.
    Stamford, Connecticut, urban transitway project.--The City 
of Stamford, in coordination with the Connecticut Department of 
Transportation (ConnDOT), and the Southwestern Regional 
Planning Agency, is proposing to design and construct a 1-mile 
Urban Transitway. This will consist of a bus lane, shared with 
high occupancy vehicles, that will provide a direct link from 
Interstate 95 to the Stamford Intermodal Transportation Center 
(SITC). The Urban Transitway project will include changes to 
the bus routes serving the SITC, improved pedestrian access, 
and the implementation of intelligent transportation systems 
(ITS). The SITC serves as a major transfer point for local bus 
and employer shuttle service and provides access to existing 
Amtrak and Metro-North rail service in the Northeast corridor. 
Currently, Metro-North operates 190 daily trains that stop at 
the SITC and approximately 2,500 riders use the service in the 
peak hours to commute from Stamford to New York City, while 
1,500 riders travel inbound to employment opportunities in 
Stamford. To accommodate additional commuter capacity at the 
SITC, the City is expanding rail platform capacity and 
constructing a 1,200-space parking facility. This project has 
been authorized in TEA21 under section 5309(e)(8)(A). Through 
fiscal year 2002, Congress has appropriated $14,850,000 for 
this project. The Committee has recommended $15,000,000 in New 
Starts funding for this project in fiscal year 2003.
    Stockton, California, Altamont Commuter Rail project.--The 
San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (SJRRC), the Alameda 
Congestion Management Agency, and the Santa Clara Valley 
Transportation Authority have implemented a commuter rail 
system along an existing Union-Pacific Railroad right-of-way 
between the three counties. A Joint Powers Board comprised of 
members from each of the three agencies was also created to 
operate the proposed Altamont Commuter Express. The SJRRC would 
be the managing agency for the initial 36-month term of an 
agreement executed between the three agencies. In addition to 
identifying potential sources for capital and operating funds, 
the member agencies will define the methods for allocating 
future costs and the shares of future capital improvement 
contributions from the member agencies. Through fiscal year 
2002, Congress has appropriated $6,910,000 in section 5309 New 
Starts funds for this effort. The Committee has recommended 
$2,000,000 in New Starts funding for this project in fiscal 
year 2003.

                 Job Access and Reverse Commute Grants


----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                   General fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002............................................     $25,000,000    $100,000,000    $125,000,000
Budget estimate, 2003...........................................      30,000,000     120,000,000     150,000,000
Committee recommendation........................................      30,000,000     120,000,000     150,000,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The Committee recommends $150,000,000 for the Job Access 
and Reverse Commute Grants program, the level guaranteed under 
the TEA21 transit category firewall. This program is meant to 
help welfare reform efforts succeed by providing enhanced 
transportation services for low-income individuals, including 
former welfare recipients, traveling to jobs or training 
centers.
    The program makes competitive grants to qualifying 
metropolitan planning organizations, local governmental 
authorities, agencies, and nonprofit organizations. Grants may 
not be used for planning or coordination activities.
    The Committee recommends the following allocations of job 
access and reverse commute grant program funds in fiscal year 
2003:

        Project                                                   Amount

Alabama Jefferson County, JARC, AL......................      $4,000,000
Alaska Mobility Coalititon, AK..........................         500,000
Allegheny Port Authority JARC, PA.......................       3,000,000
Austin Capital Metros Access to JARC, TX................       3,000,000
CalWORKS Recipient Job Center, CA.......................         750,000
Capital District Transportation Authority, Albany, NY...         550,000
Central Ohio, Mobility Management, COTA, OH.............         600,000
Chatham JARC Program, GA................................         550,000
Chautauqua Area Rural Transportation System, NY.........         100,000
Chemung County Transit, NY..............................         150,000
Columbia, Expanded Service to Rural Welfare Recipients, 
    NY..................................................         100,000
Connecticut, JARC, CT...................................       3,000,000
Corpus Christi JARC Program, TX.........................         750,000
Delaware Welfare to Work Initiative.....................         750,000
El Paso, JARC Program, TX...............................         500,000
Flint Job Access Program, MI............................         750,000
Fort Wayne's Hanna Creighton Transit Center, IN.........       1,500,000
Franklin County Expansion of Hour Service, NY...........         150,000
Grand Rapids Reverse Commute Program, MI................         675,000
Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority JARC, OH...       1,000,000
Hornell, Trans. Alternatives for Special Needs, NY......         100,000
Illinois, Ways To Work..................................         550,000
IndyGo Multi-use Downtown Transit Center, IN............         550,000
Iowa Statewide JARC.....................................       2,000,000
Jackson-Josephine County JARC Project, OR...............         325,000
Jacksonville Trans. Authority, Choice Ride Program, FL..         750,000
Kenai Peninsula, Transit Planning, AK...................         500,000
KW, Paratransit Vehicle Replacement, KS.................          60,000
LA County, UTRANS, CA...................................       1,000,000
Lafayette Ways to Work Program, LA......................         200,000
Lakeville, MA Smart Growth Planning Initiative, MA......         225,000
Lancaster-Littleton Transit Project, NH.................         100,000
Low-Income LIFT Program, SF MTC, CA.....................       2,000,000
LYNX, Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority, 
    FL..................................................         400,000
Macon-Bibb County Reverse Commute Program, GA...........         550,000
Maricopa County Worklinks Project, AZ...................         500,000
Maryland Statewide JARC, (Montgomery County--$600,000)..       4,000,000
MASCOT Matanuska-Susitna Valley, AK.....................         200,000
Metrolink Corridor Access to Jobs, MO...................       3,000,000
Missouri Statewide JARC Grants, MO......................       2,800,000
New Jersey JARC Program.................................       4,000,000
Northwest Ohio Commuter LINK, Toledo, OH................         250,000
Oklahoma Statewide Access to Jobs Program...............       4,000,000
Oregon Ways to Work Loan Program........................         500,000
Portland Metropolitan Region JARC Program, OR...........       1,500,000
Rhode Island Deployment of Flexible Services............       1,500,000
Rhode Island Statewide JARC.............................       2,000,000
Ride Share Program--MTA, CA.............................         750,000
Rochester-Genesseee Regional Transportation Authority, 
    NY..................................................         400,000
SACOG, Sacramento Region JARC Projects, CA..............       1,500,000
San Antonio, Access to Jobs Program, TX.................         925,000
Santa Clara Valley, Guaranteed Ride Home Program, CA....         350,000
SEPTA JARC, PA..........................................       3,500,000
Service for Ithaca, NY..................................         150,000
Anchorage People Mover, AK..............................         200,000
STEP-UP Job Access Project, Dayton, OH..................         250,000
Valley Metro/RPTA Job Access Program, AZ................       1,200,000
Wake County Transportation Services (WCTS) Expansion, NC         550,000
Ways to Work, Missouri..................................         450,000
Ways to Work, Yakima, WA................................         500,000
West Virginia Statewide, JARC, WV.......................       1,000,000
Wisconsin Statewide JARC................................       4,000,000
WMATA JARC, VA..........................................       1,750,000
WorkFirst transportation initiative, WA.................       3,500,000
Wyandotte Co. JARC, KS..................................       1,750,000

             SAINT LAWRENCE SEAWAY DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION

    The Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation (the 
Corporation) is a wholly owned Government corporation 
established by the Saint Lawrence Seaway Act of May 13, 1954. 
The Corporation is responsible for the operation, maintenance, 
and development of the United States portion of the Saint 
Lawrence Seaway between Montreal and Lake Erie. The 
Corporation's major priorities include: safety, reliability, 
trade development, and management accountability.

                       Operations and Maintenance


                    (HARBOR MAINTENANCE TRUST FUND)

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................     $13,345,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\...............................      14,086,000
Committee recommendation................................      13,345,000

\1\ Does not reflect reduction of $11,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 or reduction of $10,000 pursuant to section 1106 of 
Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Excludes $702,000 CSRS/FEHB accruals.

    Appropriations from the Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund and 
revenues from non-federal sources finances the operation and 
maintenance of the Seaway for which the corporation is 
responsible.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The Committee recommendation includes $13,345,000 to fund 
the operations and maintenance of the Corporation. The 
Committee recommendation provides sufficient funding for the 
Corporation's highest capital priorities and the projects 
recommended by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers after its 
survey and evaluation of the Corporation's lock and maintenance 
practices. Based on independent security assessments, the 
Corporation plans to implement additional security measures for 
the Saint Lawrence Seaway in 2003. The Corporation anticipates 
$820,000 in new and revised security measures.
    The Committee notes the efforts made by the Saint Lawrence 
Seaway Development Corporation to enhance the security of 
Seaway infrastructure and maintain an open, yet secure 
waterway. Following the events of September 11, 2001, the SLSDC 
developed new security protocols that enhanced the security of 
the locks and other critical infrastructure along the Seaway. 
Additionally, in coordination with their Canadian counterparts, 
the SLSDC conducted a vulnerability assessment and developed a 
new Risk Assessment Inspection for certain high risk foreign-
flag vessels that met the needs of the United States but was 
conducted while the vessel was in Canadian waters. The 
Committee applauds these efforts and directs the SLSDC to 
translate this information to the Transportation Security 
Administration and provide a report to both the House and 
Senate Appropriations Committees on the status of these 
initiatives and any further recommendations that the TSA may 
have to ensure consistent security initiatives are present to 
protect and secure the nation's borders and waterways. Any such 
recommendations should be appropriately noted the subsequent 
fiscal year 2004 budget request.

              RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS ADMINISTRATION

    The Research and Special Programs Administration [RSPA] was 
established by the Secretary of Transportation's organizational 
changes dated July 20, 1977, and serves as a research, 
analytical, and technical development arm of the Department for 
multimodal research and development, as well as special 
programs. Particular emphasis is given to pipeline 
transportation and the transportation of hazardous cargo by all 
modes. In 2003, resources are requested for the management and 
execution of the Offices of Hazardous Materials Safety, 
Emergency Transportation, Pipeline Safety, and program and 
administrative support. Funds are also requested for the 
emergency preparedness grants program. RSPA's two reimbursable 
programs--Transportation Safety Institute [TSI] and the Volpe 
National Transportation Systems Center [VNTSC]--support 
research safety and security programs for all modes of 
transportation.

                     Research and Special Programs

Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\............................     $37,279,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \3\ \4\...........................      38,391,000
Committee recommendation................................      43,725,000

\1\ Does not reflect rescissions of $113,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
87 and $97,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $2,500,000 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\3\ Does not include $5,987,000 in proposed new user fees.
\4\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $1,316,000.

    The Committee has provided a total of $44,378,000 for the 
``Research and special programs'' account, which is the same as 
the budget request.
    The following table summarizes the Committee 
recommendations:

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    Fiscal year
                                                                   2002 enacted     Fiscal year      Committee
                                                                        \1\        2003 estimate  recommendation
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hazardous materials safety......................................     $21,217,000     $23,079,000     $23,079,000
New hazardous materials user fees...............................  ..............      $5,987,000  ..............
    (FTE).......................................................           (132)           (136)           (136)
Emergency transportation........................................      $1,897,000      $2,058,000      $2,058,000
    (FTE).......................................................             (9)            (10)            (10)
Research and technology.........................................      $2,784,000      $2,854,000      $2,854,000
    (FTE).......................................................             (9)             (9)             (9)
Program and administrative support..............................     $11,381,000     $16,387,000     $15,734,000
    (FTE).......................................................            (50)            (60)            (59)
                                                                 -----------------------------------------------
      Total, research and special programs......................     $37,279,000     $38,391,000     $43,725,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect rescissions of $113,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and $97,000 pursuant to Public Law
  107-117.
\2\ Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $2,500,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-117.

                       HAZARDOUS MATERIALS SAFETY

    The Office of Hazardous Materials Safety [OHMS] administers 
a nationwide program of safety regulations to fulfill the 
Secretary's duty to protect the Nation from the risks to life, 
health, and property that are inherent in the transportation of 
hazardous materials by water, air, highway, and railroad. OHMS 
plans, implements, and manages the hazardous materials 
transportation program consisting of information systems, 
research and analysis, inspection and enforcement, rulemaking 
support, training and information dissemination, and emergency 
procedures.
    The Committee recommends $23,079,000 for hazardous 
materials safety, which is the same as the budget request.
    Hazardous Materials Registration Fee Increase.--The 
Committee does not support the requested bill language to 
increase the Hazardous Materials Registration Fee that would 
result in an estimated additional collection of $6,000,000 in 
fiscal year 2003. The intended purpose of this increase is to 
finance part of the Hazardous Materials Safety Program. The 
Committee has denied the use of industry assessed fees to fund 
the Hazardous Materials Safety Program in the past and again 
denies this request.

                        EMERGENCY TRANSPORTATION

    Emergency transportation (ET) programs provide support to 
the Secretary of Transportation for his statutory and 
administrative responsibilities in the area of transportation 
civil emergency preparedness and response. This program 
develops and coordinates the Department's policies, plans, and 
programs, in headquarters and the field to provide for 
emergency preparedness.
    ET is responsible for implementing the Transportation 
Department's National Security Program initiatives, including 
an assessment of the transportation implications of the 
changing global threat. The Office also coordinates civil 
emergency preparedness and response for transportation services 
during national and regional emergencies, across the entire 
continuum of crises, including natural catastrophes such as 
earthquakes, hurricanes and tornados, and international and 
domestic terrorism. The Office of Emergency Transportation 
develops crisis management plans to mitigate disasters and 
implements these plans nationally and regionally in an 
emergency.
    The Committee recommends $2,058,000 for emergency 
transportation, which is the same as the budget request.

                        RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

    The Committee recommends $2,854,000 for the Office of 
Research and Technology, which is the same as the budget 
request. The funds provided will help the Department coordinate 
and strengthen its responsibilities under TEA21, and will help 
support the R&T organizational excellence strategy specified in 
the Department's strategic plan, allow RSPA to support the 
intergovernmental transportation research coordination 
responsibilities of the National Science and Technology 
Council, and support a limited intermodal research program.
    The Committee supports the request for R&D planning. These 
funds are used to conduct a diversity of activities of 
fundamental importance to the Department and to help coordinate 
transportation-related research throughout the Government. For 
example, these funds are used to support technology transfer 
and in particular to ensure that R&T advances made in the 
international arena are made available to various modes within 
the Department. These planning funds are the sole source for 
longer-term, visionary R&T planning in the Department. In 
addition, these funds are used to support research and 
education planning that applies to all of the modes. Most 
importantly, one of the key purposes of these funds is to 
eliminate any duplication of research within the DOT.

                   PROGRAM AND ADMINISTRATIVE SUPPORT

    The program support function provides legal, financial, 
management, and administrative support to the operating offices 
within RSPA. These support activities include executive 
direction (Office of the Administrator), program and policy 
support, civil rights and special programs, legal services and 
support, and management and administration.
    The Committee has provided $15,734,000 for program and 
administrative support, which is consistent with the budget 
request.

                     RESEARCH AND SPECIAL PROGRAMS

    Business Modernization.--Public Law 107-87 directed RSPA to 
develop an Information Technology Strategic Plan outlining 
improvements in information technology and business 
modernization. In advance of this plan, the administration 
requested $3,616,000 for IT infrastructure improvements and 
identified RSPA's need to remedy its weak IT infrastructure as 
its number one priority for fiscal year 2003. The Committee 
supports the need to overhaul RSPA's Information Management 
Program but remains exceedingly concerned by RSPA's inability 
to develop a true Information Technology Strategic Plan that 
identifies what RSPA's information needs are, identifies who 
needs access to the information, and identifies the resulting 
system infrastructure requirements.
    The Strategic Plan, dated February 1, 2002, does none of 
these things. It does, however, call for an additional 
$3,500,000 dollars for further IT consulting expenses. The plan 
also identifies $9,100,000 that will be necessary for software 
development and hardware acquisition. The Committee disagrees 
that this level of funding is necessary for either the 
consulting costs or the IT infrastructure development. As such, 
the Committee directs that no additional funds shall be 
expended for consulting costs for this initiative and directs 
RSPA to proceed with the hiring of their IT personnel. The 
Committee approves the request for 10 positions and 7 FTEs for 
information technology support. It is essential that RSPA hire 
the appropriate technical expertise to allow them to develop a 
true Strategic Information Technology Plan in house. The 
Committee approves the request for $3,600,000 but directs RSPA 
to provide a Strategic Information Technology Plan, of no more 
than 15 pages, to both the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations by December 31, 2002. The Strategic Plan shall 
be submitted prior to any IT expenditure beyond the hiring of 
Information Technology Specialists. Within this Strategic Plan 
RSPA should identify their infrastructure spending plan and 
address information security.
    New Full Time Equivalent Positions Request.--Within the 
Administration's Personnel Compensation and Benefits request, 
17 positions and 12 FTE's are requested. Of those personnel 
requested, one position and one FTE is for an emergency 
transportation military liaison position. This position is 
currently filled with a military fellow provided by the 
Department of Defense. While the Committee believes that a 
military liaison is beneficial to the Office of Emergency 
Transportation, funding should continue to be provided by the 
Department of Defense.

                            Pipeline Safety


                         (PIPELINE SAFETY FUND)

                    (OILSPILL LIABILITY TRUST FUND)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                     Pipeline
                                                                    safety fund     Trust fund         Total
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\........................................     $50,386,000      $7,864,000     $58,250,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\.......................................      56,385,000       7,472,000      63,857,000
Committee recommendation........................................      56,385,000       7,472,000      63,857,000
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect rescissions of $74,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-87 and $64,000 pursuant to Public Law 107-
  117.
\2\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $653,000.

    The Research and Special Programs Administration is 
responsible for the Department's Pipeline Safety Program. 
Funding for the Office of Pipeline Safety is made available 
from two primary sources: the pipeline safety fund, comprised 
of user fees assessed on interstate pipeline operators; and the 
oil spill liability trust fund, a revolving fund comprised of 
an environmental tax on petroleum and oil spill damage recovery 
payments. The Pipeline Safety Program promotes the safe, 
reliable, and environmentally sound transportation of natural 
gas and hazardous liquids by pipeline. This national program 
regulates the design, construction, operation, maintenance, and 
emergency response procedures pertaining to gas and hazardous 
liquids pipeline systems and liquefied natural gas facilities. 
Also included is research and development to support the 
Pipeline Safety Program and grants-in-aid to State agencies 
that conduct a qualified pipeline safety program and to others 
who operate one-call programs.
    The Committee's recommendation for the Federal pipeline 
safety program generally supports, and is consistent with, the 
key provisions of the Senate-passed version of the pipeline 
safety reauthorization bill. The Committee recommends 
$63,857,000 for the Department's Pipeline Safety Program, which 
is consistent with the budget estimate. The bill specifies 
that, of the total appropriation, $56,385,000 shall be from the 
pipeline safety fund and $7,472,000 shall be from the oil spill 
liability trust fund.
    Enforcement of Consensus Guidelines.--The Office of 
Pipeline Safety, the pipeline industry and various Federal 
agencies are working to finalize consensus guidelines and 
regulatory standards on the different security measures that 
should be taken by critical pipeline facilities. The Committee 
maintains that it is essential that OPS has sufficient legal 
authorities to ensure compliance with either these guidelines 
or standards. To that end, the Department's General Counsel 
shall submit a report to the House and Senate Committees on 
Appropriations before January 1, 2003, specifying the legal 
authorities that OPS will use to bring either enforcement 
actions or issue facility orders against any operator of a 
critical pipeline facility that fails to comply with the OPS-
endorsed guidelines or consensus standards relevant to pipeline 
security at different threat levels. The Counsel will also 
assess the need for regulatory action in this area.
    National Pipeline Safety and Operations Research 
Consortium.--Within the funds provided for research and 
development, the Committee encourages the administrator to 
support the creation of a National Pipeline Safety and 
Operations Research Consortium to increase the operational 
efficiency and system safety of pipeline transportation for 
both liquid and gas commodities. The Center will apply emerging 
technologies to the pipeline industry to benefit both carriers 
and pipeline customers to increase the physical safety and 
integrity and productivity of the nation's pipeline network.
    Research and development.--The Committee recommends 
$3,970,000 for pipeline safety research, which is consistent 
with the amount requested. Within the funds provided, $600,000 
shall be used for airborne environmental laser mapping 
technology research and engineering to support improved leak 
detection, analysis, and response by Federal, State, and 
industry pipeline safety officials.

                     Emergency Preparedness Grants


                     (EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FUND)

Appropriations, 2002....................................        $200,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................         200,000
Committee recommendation................................         200,000

    The hazardous materials transportation law (title 49 U.S.C. 
5101 et seq.) requires RSPA to: (1) develop and implement a 
reimbursable emergency preparedness grants program; (2) monitor 
public sector emergency response training and planning and 
provide technical assistance to States, territories, and Indian 
tribes; and (3) develop and update periodically a national 
training curriculum for emergency responders. These activities 
are financed by receipts received from the hazardous materials 
shipper and carrier registration fees, which are placed in the 
emergency preparedness fund. The hazardous materials 
transportation law provides permanent authorization for the 
emergency preparedness fund for planning and training grants, 
monitoring and technical assistance, and for administrative 
expenses. An appropriation of $200,000 in budget authority, 
also from the emergency preparedness fund, provides for the 
training curriculum for emergency responders.

                       LIMITATION ON OBLIGATIONS

    Bill language is included that limits the obligation of 
emergency preparedness training grants to $14,300,000 in fiscal 
year 2003.

                      OFFICE OF INSPECTOR GENERAL


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002 \1\ \2\............................     $50,614,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\ \3\...........................      57,421,000
Committee recommendation................................      57,421,000

\1\ Does not reflect reductions of $108,000 pursuant to section 349 of 
Public Law 107-87 and $93,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law 
107-117. Does not reflect emergency supplemental funding of $1,300,000 
pursuant to Public Law 107-117.
\2\ Does not include reimbursements of $3,524,000 from FHWA, $2,000,000 
from FTA, $2,000,000 from FAA; and $100,000 from NTSB.
\3\ Excludes CSRS/FEHB accruals of $2,532,000.

    The Inspector General Act of 1978 established the Office of 
Inspector General [OIG] as an independent and objective 
organization, with a mission to: (1) conduct and supervise 
audits and investigations relating to the programs and 
operations of the Department; (2) provide leadership and 
recommend policies designed to promote economy, efficiency, and 
effectiveness in the administration of programs and operations; 
(3) prevent and detect fraud, waste, and abuse; and (4) keep 
the Secretary and Congress currently informed regarding 
problems and deficiencies.
    OIG is divided into two major functional units: the Office 
of Assistant Inspector General for Auditing and the Office of 
Assistant Inspector General for Investigations. The assistant 
inspectors general for auditing and investigations are 
supported by headquarters and regional staff.
    The Committee recommends $57,421,000.

                      SURFACE TRANSPORTATION BOARD


                         Salaries and Expenses


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                            Crediting
                                        Appropriation      offsetting
                                                           collections
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Appropriations, 2002 \1\.............      $18,457,000         $950,000
Budget estimate, 2003 \2\............       19,459,000        1,000,000
Committee recommendation.............       19,459,000        1,000,000
------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Does not reflect reductions of $5,000 pursuant to section 349 of
  Public Law 107-87 and $4,000 pursuant to section 1106 of Public Law
  107-117.
\2\ Excludes $1,192,300 in CSRS retirement and FEHB accruals.

    The Surface Transportation Board was created on January 1, 
1996, by Public Law 104-88, the Interstate Commerce Commission 
Termination Act of 1995 (ICCTA) . Consistent with the continued 
trend toward less regulation of the surface transportation 
industry, the ICCTA abolished the ICC, eliminated certain 
functions that had previously been implemented by the ICC, 
transferred core rail and certain other functions to the Board, 
and transferred motor licensing and certain other motor 
functions to DOT and are now being administered by FMCSA. The 
Board is specifically responsible for the regulation of the 
rail and pipeline industries and certain nonlicensing 
regulation of motor carriers and water carriers. Moreover, the 
Board, through its exemption authority, is able to promote 
deregulation administratively on a case-by-case basis. Rail 
reforms made by the Staggers Rail Act of 1980 also have been 
continued.
    The Committee has provided $19,459,000 for activities of 
the Board. Included in the recommended amount is an estimated 
$1,000,000 in fees to be collected, which will offset the 
appropriated funding. The Board is authorized to credit the 
fees collected to the appropriated amount as offsetting 
collections reducing the general funds appropriation on a 
dollar-for-dollar basis as the fees are received and collected.
    The Committee's recommendation will fund a total of 145 
full-time staff equivalent (FTE) positions, if the Board 
collects the full $1,000,000 in user fees. Between now and 
September 30, 2003, 46 percent of the Board's employees will be 
eligible for voluntary retirement. The Committee encourages the 
Board to move expeditiously in filling vacancies as retirements 
occur in order to ensure that the oversight functions of the 
Board are not compromised.

                       TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES

       ARCHITECTURAL AND TRANSPORTATION BARRIERS COMPLIANCE BOARD

                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002 \1\................................      $5,015,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................       5,194,000
Committee recommendation................................       5,194,000

\1\ Does not include reduction of $146,000 pursuant to section 301 of 
Public Law 106-113.

    The Committee recommends $5,194,000 for the operations of 
the Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board, 
the funding level requested by the administration.
    The Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance 
Board (the Access Board) is the lead Federal Agency promoting 
accessibility for all handicapped persons. The Access Board was 
reauthorized in the Rehabilitation Act Amendments of 1992, 
Public Law 102-569. Under this authorization, the Access 
Board's functions are to ensure compliance with the 
Architectural Barriers Act of 1968, and to develop guidelines 
for and technical assistance to individuals and entities with 
rights or duties under titles II and III of the Americans with 
Disabilities Act. The Access Board establishes minimum 
accessibility guidelines and requirements for public 
accommodations and commercial facilities, transit facilities 
and vehicles, State and local government facilities, children's 
environments, and recreational facilities. The Access Board 
also provides technical assistance to Government agencies, 
public and private organizations, individuals, and businesses 
on the removal of accessibility barriers.
    The Committee's recommendation provides adequate funding to 
support 32.8 FTE, 2 FTE more than the fiscal year 2000 staffing 
level, consistent with the Board's budget request.

                  NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SAFETY BOARD


                         Salaries and Expenses

Appropriations, 2002....................................     $68,650,000
Budget estimate, 2003...................................      70,480,000
Committee recommendation................................      72,500,000

    The Independent Safety Board Act of 1974 established the 
National Transportation Safety Board [NTSB] as an independent 
Federal agency to promote transportation safety by conducting 
independent accident investigations. In addition, the act 
authorizes the Board to make safety recommendations, conduct 
safety studies, and oversee safety activities of other 
Government agencies involved in transportation. The Board also 
reviews appeals of adverse actions by the Department of 
Transportation with respect to airmen and seamen certificates 
and licenses.
    The Board has no regulatory authority over the 
transportation industry. Thus, its effectiveness depends on its 
reputation for impartial and accurate accident reports, 
realistic and feasible safety recommendations, and on public 
confidence in its commitment to improving transportation 
safety.

                        COMMITTEE RECOMMENDATION

    The bill includes $72,500,000 for the National 
Transportation Safety Board. The Committee recommendation is 
$3,850,000 above the amount provided in fiscal year 2002 and 
$2,020,000 more than the budget request. The Committee notes 
that the National Transportation Safety Board Amendments Act of 
2000 (Public Law 106-424) requires the Board, among other 
things, to provide the payment of true overtime for 
investigators and to implement the financial management control 
initiatives that were recommended by a private sector audit 
firm last year. The Committee's recommendation includes 
additional funding to annualize 25 new positions; provide true 
overtime payment costs; to provide 24 additional FTE's; and, to 
implement financial management programs. This is 13 more FTE's 
than requested by the administration for the enhancement of 
investigative staff.

                     TITLE III--GENERAL PROVISIONS

    The Committee concurs with the general provisions that 
apply to the Department of Transportation and related agencies 
as proposed in the budget, with some changes, deletions, and 
additions. These are noted below:
    Sec. 304. Modifies a requested provision to prohibit the 
use of funds for the salaries and expenses to no more than 100 
political and presidential appointees to the Department of 
Transportation.
    Sec. 316. Modifies a provision regarding the funding of 
administrative expenses for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 
Administration and the Federal Highway Administration.
    Sec. 318. Modifies a provision regarding funds made 
available to Alaska or Hawaii for ferry boats, ferry terminals 
and ferry passenger service.
    Sec. 320. Includes a provision exempting a general aviation 
airport with more than 300,000 annual operations from having to 
accept scheduled passenger service provided that airport meets 
specific conditions.
    Sec. 322. Includes a provision permitting funds from Public 
Law 106-69 and Public Law 106-346 for the Wilmington, Delaware 
downtown corridor project shall be available for the 
Wilmington, Delaware commuter rail improvements.
    Sec. 324. Includes a provision transferring the operation 
and maintenance of the instrument landing system at the Walnut 
Ridge Regional Airport, Arkansas to the Federal Aviation 
Administration.
    Sec. 325. Includes a provision transferring the operation 
and maintenance of the air traffic control tower at Williams 
Gateway Airport, Arizona to the Federal Aviation 
Administration.
    Sec. 327. Includes a provision regarding a highway in 
Alaska.
    Sec. 329. Includes a provision which modifies section 
1211(i) of Public Law 105-178 to define the Alameda Corridor 
East and Southwest Passage, California high priority corridor.
    Sec. 330. Provides $160,000,000 to the Secretary of 
Transportation to make grants for surface transportation 
projects. The Committee's recommendation represents a 
$16,000,000 increase over the amount that was appropriated in 
fiscal year 2002. Funds provided for this program for fiscal 
year 2003 shall be available for the following activities:

        Project                                                   Amount

Aberdeen, SD to Geneseo, ND Rail Repair Project.........        $650,000
Adrian's Landing Urban Development Roadway Reallignment 
    Project, Hartford, CT...............................       5,000,000
Arkwright Connector, Spartanburg SC.....................       1,200,000
Aroostook County North-South Highways, ME...............       5,000,000
Baseline Road, Isabella, Nottawa, Deerfield, Union, MI..       1,000,000
Bowling Green Riverfront Project, KY....................       4,000,000
Bremerton, Ferry Exit Tunnel, WA........................       3,000,000
Broomsfield Wadsworth Interchange, CO...................       4,000,000
Caraway Road Overpass Project, Jonesboro AR.............       3,000,000
Cedar Ave. Bus Rapid Transit Project, MN................       3,000,000
Council Bluffs US-6 Study/Preliminary Design, IA........       2,000,000
David L. Lawrence Convention Center, Riverfront Park, 
    Pittsburgh, PA......................................       1,400,000
Dubuque Southwest Arterial, IA..........................       3,000,000
East Chicago, Railroad Ave. Grade Crossing Separation, 
    IN..................................................       3,000,000
Elkhart Underpass, IN...................................       4,000,000
Farrington Highway, HI..................................       1,000,000
General Mitchell International Airport Passenger Rail 
    Station, 
    WI..................................................       5,000,000
Hana Highway, HI........................................       1,000,000
I-405 Corridor Tukwila to Lynnwood, WA..................       2,500,000
John Wright Drive--Huntsville, AL.......................       6,600,000
Juneau Heliport, AK.....................................       2,000,000
Lenexa Prairie Star Expressway, KS......................       3,000,000
Matanuska-Susitna Borough road improvements, AK.........       5,000,000
Main Ave. Bridge & Pedestrian/Bicycle Amenities, Fargo 
    ND..................................................       3,000,000
Martin Luther King, Jr. Parkway, Des Moines, IA.........       5,000,000
Missouri River Trail, ND................................       2,000,000
Montpelier Downtown Redevelopment Project, VT...........       2,500,000
Old Dominion University Maglev Project, Norfolk, VA.....       2,000,000
Olympic Discovery Trail, WA.............................       1,000,000
Phalen Blvd. Project, St. Paul, MN......................       5,000,000
Pierre Rail Bypass, SD..................................       6,000,000
Portland, Safety Enhancement, ME........................       1,000,000
Route 14 Truck Bypass Project, Huron, SD................       2,350,000
Saddle Road improvements, HI............................       4,000,000
South & East Beltway System Construction, NE............       5,000,000
SR 67/605 in Saucier, MS................................       5,000,000
SR-104/Hood Canal Bridge East Half Replacement, WA......       2,000,000
SR-99/Alaskan Way Viaduct & Seattle Seawall Replacement, 

    WA..................................................       2,500,000
St. Louis Major Arterial Road Improvement/Renovation, MO       4,000,000
Trunk Highway 610/10, Twin Cities, MN...................       3,000,000
Tucson Railroad Grade Crossing Project, AZ..............       1,500,000
Tuscaloosa Downtown Revitalization Project, AL..........       5,000,000
Umatilla Intermodal Facility, OR........................       3,800,000
US-14 Expansion and Improvements, MN....................       2,000,000
US-81 & Highway 30 Arterial Improvements, Columbus, NE..       2,500,000
US-93, Westside Kalispell Bypass Project, MT............       2,500,000
US-95, Worley to Mica, stage 2, ID......................       7,000,000
WSU Composite Applications for Ferries, WA..............       1,000,000
WV Route 9, Jefferson and Berkeley Counties, WV.........      10,000,000

    Sec. 331. Includes a provision directing the Secretary of 
Transportation to approve the use of national highway system 
and surface transportation funds for construction of noise 
barriers in Georgia.
    Sec. 332. Modifies a provision from the fiscal year 2000 
appropriations act which prohibits the use of funds in this Act 
unless the Secretary of Transportation notifies the House and 
Senate Committees on Appropriations not less than 3 full 
business days before any discretionary grant award is made 
under section 1221 of Public Law 107-178 as amended, and before 
any award totaling $500,000 or more is announced by the 
Department or its modal administrations. The administration 
proposed deleting this provision.
    Sec. 333. Includes a provision naming buildings at the 
William J. Hughes Technical Center as the ``Frank R. Lautenberg 
Aviation Security Complex.''
    Sec. 334. Includes a provision requiring a National Academy 
of Sciences study regarding the shipment of spent nuclear fuel 
from research nuclear reactors.
    Sec. 336. Includes a provision which would reimburse the 
city of Escanaba, Michigan for the costs incurred for repairing 
a municipal dock that is utilized by the United States Coast 
Guard.
    Sec. 337. Includes a provision permitting newly designated 
urbanized areas as a result of the 2000 decennial census to use 
FTA funds for operating costs in the same amount that was 
provided in fiscal year 2002. This provision applies for fiscal 
year 2003 only.
    Sec. 339. Includes a provision allowing grants for the 
construction of an air traffic control tower at Double Eagle II 
Airport, New Mexico.
    Sec. 340. Modifies a provision from a previous 
appropriations act permitting Section 402 funds to be used to 
produce and place highway safety messages on paid media outlets 
and designating certain Section 157 and Section 410 funds for 
paid media to support national law enforcement mobilizations on 
seat belt use and impaired driving.
    Sec. 341. Modifies a provision from the fiscal year 2002 
appropriations act regarding Coast Guard Yard in Curtis Bay, 
Maryland and other Coast Guard specialized facilities. The 
administration proposed deleting this provision.
    Sec. 342. Retains a provision prohibiting funds for the 
Office of the Secretary of Transportation to be reprogrammed 
without Congressional notification. The administration proposed 
deleting this provision.
    Sec. 343. Includes a provision regarding Federal share for 
certain highway funds.
    Sec. 344. Includes a provision regarding the Hoover Dam 
Bypass Bridge.
    Sec. 346. Retains a provision allowing discretionary bridge 
funding to be used for historic covered bridges. The 
administration proposed deleting this provision.
    Sec. 347. Modifies a provision requiring quarterly reports 
on major Coast Guard acquisition and mission hour emphasis. The 
administration proposed deleting this provision.
    Sec. 348. Includes a provision amending Section 1503 and 
Section 1101(a)(9) of Public Law 105-178.
    Sec. 349. Includes a provision regarding safety which the 
administration had requested be deleted that reduces the funds 
provided for the Transportation Administrative Service Center.
    Sec. 350. Extends a provision from the fiscal year 2002 
appropriations act regarding the safety of cross-border 
trucking between the United States and Mexico. The 
administration proposed deleting this provision.
    Sec. 351. Includes a provision making capital funds 
available for FAA facilities and equipment.
    Sec. 352. Includes a provision which expands the exemption 
from Federal axle weight restrictions presently applicable only 
to public transit buses to all over-the-road buses.
    Sec. 353. Includes a provision regarding funds for the 
construction of roads and bridges in Lake Charles, Louisiana.
    Sec. 354. Includes a provision regarding a rescission in 
the Fiscal Year 2002 Supplemental Appropriations Act for 
Further Recovery From and Response To Terrorist Attacks on the 
United States.

  COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7, RULE XVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 7 of rule XVI requires that Committee reports 
accompanying general appropriations bills identify each 
recommended amendment which proposes an item of appropriation 
which is not made to carry out the provisions of an existing 
law, a treaty stipulation, or an act or resolution previously 
passed by the Senate during that session.
    Coast Guard
        Operating Expenses
        Acquisition, Construction, and Improvements
        Environmental Compliance and Restoration
        Alteration of Bridges
        Reserve Training
        Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation
    Federal Aviation Administration
        Office of Commercial Space Transportation
        Research, Engineering, and Development
    Federal Highway Administration
        Child Passenger Protection Education Grants
    Federal Railroad Administration
        Safety and Operations
    National Railroad Passenger Corporation (AMTRAK)
    National Transportation Safety Board

COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 7(C), RULE XXVI, OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Pursuant to paragraph 7(c) of rule XXVI, on July 25, 2002, 
the Committee ordered reported en bloc, S. 2801, an original 
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, 
and Related Agencies Programs Appropriations bill, 2003; S. 
2809, an original District of Columbia Appropriations bill, 
2003; S. 2808, an original Transportation and Related Agencies 
Appropriations bill, 2003; and S. 2797, an original Veterans 
Affairs and Housing and Urban Development, and Independent 
Agencies Appropriations bill, 2003, each subject to amendment 
and each subject to the budget allocations, by a recorded vote 
of 29-0, a quorum being present. The vote was as follows:
        Yeas                          Nays
Chairman Byrd
Mr. Inouye
Mr. Hollings
Mr. Leahy
Mr. Harkin
Ms. Mikulski
Mr. Reid
Mr. Kohl
Mrs. Murray
Mr. Dorgan
Mrs. Feinstein
Mr. Durbin
Mr. Johnson
Ms. Landrieu
Mr. Reed
Mr. Stevens
Mr. Cochran
Mr. Specter
Mr. Domenici
Mr. Bond
Mr. McConnell
Mr. Burns
Mr. Shelby
Mr. Gregg
Mr. Bennett
Mr. Campbell
Mr. Craig
Mrs. Hutchison
Mr. DeWine

 COMPLIANCE WITH PARAGRAPH 12, RULE XXVI OF THE STANDING RULES OF THE 
                                 SENATE

    Paragraph 12 of rule XXVI requires that Committee reports 
on a bill or joint resolution repealing or amending any statute 
or part of any statute include ``(a) the text of the statute or 
part thereof which is proposed to be repealed; and (b) a 
comparative print of that part of the bill or joint resolution 
making the amendment and of the statute or part thereof 
proposed to be amended, showing by stricken-through type and 
italics, parallel columns, or other appropriate typographical 
devices the omissions and insertions which would be made by the 
bill or joint resolution if enacted in the form recommended by 
the committee.''
    In compliance with this rule, the following changes in 
existing law proposed to be made by the bill are shown as 
follows: existing law to be omitted is enclosed in black 
brackets; new matter is printed in italic; and existing law in 
which no change is proposed is shown in roman.
    With respect to this bill, it is the opinion of the 
Committee that it is necessary to dispense with these 
requirements in order to expedite the business of the Senate.

                                            BUDGETARY IMPACT OF BILL
  PREPARED IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE PURSUANT TO SEC. 308(a), PUBLIC LAW 93-344, AS
                                                     AMENDED
                                            [In millions of dollars]
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                              Budget authority                 Outlays
                                                       ---------------------------------------------------------
                                                           Committee     Amount of      Committee     Amount of
                                                        allocation \1\      bill     allocation \1\      bill
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Comparison of amounts in the bill with Committee
 allocations to its subcommittees, fiscal year 2003:
 Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies:
    Discretionary.....................................         21,300        21,300         62,101    \2\ 59,879
    Mandatory.........................................             NA          -117             NA           854
Projections of outlays associated with the
 recommendation:
    2003..............................................  ..............  ...........  ..............   \3\ 23,449
    2004..............................................  ..............  ...........  ..............       21,362
    2005..............................................  ..............  ...........  ..............        8,579
    2006..............................................  ..............  ...........  ..............        3,817
    2007 and future year..............................  ..............  ...........  ..............        4,979
Financial assistance to State and local governments                NA         1,978             NA         9,995
 for  2003............................................
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Levels approved by the Committee on June 27, as modified on July 25, 2002.
\2\ Includes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
\3\ Excludes outlays from prior-year budget authority.
NA: Not applicable.


  COMPARATIVE STATEMENT OF NEW BUDGET (OBLIGATIONAL) AUTHORITY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2002 AND BUDGET ESTIMATES AND AMOUNTS RECOMMENDED IN THE BILL FOR FISCAL
                                                                        YEAR 2003
                                                                [In thousands of dollars]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                                                                        Senate Committee recommendation
                                                                                                                            compared with (+ or -)
                             Item                                     2002         Budget estimate      Committee    -----------------------------------
                                                                  appropriation                      recommendation         2002
                                                                                                                        appropriation    Budget estimate
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
             TITLE I--DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
                    Office of the Secretary
Salaries and expenses.........................................           67,778            92,460            73,069            +5,291           -19,391
    Immediate Office of the Secretary.........................           (1,929)  ................           (2,034)            (+105)          (+2,034)
    Immediate Office of the Deputy Secretary..................             (619)  ................             (619)  ................            (+619)
    Immediate Office of the Secretary and Deputy Secretary....  ................           (4,411)  ................  ................          (-4,411)
    Office of the General Counsel.............................          (13,355)          (15,657)          (13,828)            (+473)          (-1,829)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Policy..............           (3,058)  ................           (3,058)  ................          (+3,058)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and                   (7,421)  ................           (7,471)             (+50)          (+7,471)
     International Affairs....................................
    Office of the Under Secretary for Transportation Policy...  ................          (12,453)  ................  ................         (-12,453)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Budget and Programs.           (7,728)           (8,375)           (7,668)             (-60)            (-707)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Governmental Affairs           (2,282)           (2,453)           (2,282)  ................            (-171)
    Office of the Assistant Secretary for Administration......          (19,250)          (29,285)          (20,380)          (+1,130)          (-8,905)
    Office of Public Affairs..................................           (1,723)           (1,926)           (1,723)  ................            (-203)
    Executive Secretariat.....................................           (1,204)  ................           (1,204)  ................          (+1,204)
    Board of Contract Appeals.................................             (507)             (611)             (507)  ................            (-104)
    Office of Small and Disadvantaged Business Utilization....           (1,240)           (1,304)           (1,304)             (+64)  ................
    Office of Intelligence and Security.......................           (1,321)  ................  ................          (-1,321)  ................
    Office of the Chief Information Officer...................           (6,141)          (15,987)          (10,991)          (+4,850)          (-4,996)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................          (67,778)          (92,462)          (73,069)          (+5,291)         (-19,393)
Office of Civil Rights........................................            8,500             8,700             8,700              +200   ................
Transportation Security Administration........................        1,250,000   ................  ................       -1,250,000   ................
    Offsetting collections....................................       -1,250,000   ................  ................       +1,250,000   ................
Transportation planning, research, and development............           11,993            10,700            21,000            +9,007           +10,300
Transportation Administrative Service Center..................         (125,323)         (131,779)         (131,779)          (+6,456)  ................
Minority business resource center program.....................              900               900               900   ................  ................
    (Limitation on guaranteed loans)..........................          (18,367)          (18,367)          (18,367)  ................  ................
Minority business outreach....................................            3,000             3,000             3,000   ................  ................
New headquarters building.....................................  ................           25,000   ................  ................          -25,000
Small community air service development pilot program.........           20,000   ................  ................          -20,000   ................
Payments to air carriers (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)........           13,000   ................           65,000           +52,000           +65,000
    Emergency supplemental....................................           50,000   ................  ................          -50,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Office of the Secretary..........................        1,425,171           140,760           171,669        -1,253,502           +30,909
          Rescission..........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
          Offsetting collections..............................       -1,250,000   ................  ................       +1,250,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................          175,171           140,760           171,669            -3,502           +30,909
            Transportation Security Administration
Salaries and expenses.........................................  ................        4,800,000         4,950,000        +4,950,000          +150,000
    Offsetting collections....................................  ................       -2,774,000        -2,774,000        -2,774,000   ................
    Emergency supplemental....................................           94,800   ................  ................          -94,800   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................           94,800         2,026,000         2,176,000        +2,081,200          +150,000
                          Coast Guard
Operating expenses............................................        2,942,000         3,978,456         3,678,456          +736,456          -300,000
        (By transfer).........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
    Defense function..........................................          440,000           340,000           340,000          -100,000   ................
    Offset for new user fees..................................  ................         -165,000   ................  ................         +165,000
    Emergency supplemental....................................          209,150   ................  ................         -209,150   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................        3,591,150         4,153,456         4,018,456          +427,306          -135,000
Acquisition, construction, and improvements...................          636,354           725,000           725,000           +88,646   ................
    Vessels...................................................          (89,640)          (13,600)          (13,600)         (-76,040)  ................
    Aircraft..................................................           (9,500)  ................  ................          (-9,500)  ................
    Other equipment...........................................          (79,293)         (117,700)         (117,700)         (+38,407)  ................
    Shore facilities & aids to navigation facilities..........          (73,100)          (28,700)          (48,700)         (-24,400)         (+20,000)
    Personnel and related support.............................          (64,631)          (65,000)          (65,000)            (+369)  ................
    Integrated Deepwater Systems..............................         (320,190)         (500,000)         (480,000)        (+159,810)         (-20,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, AC&I..........................................         (636,354)         (725,000)         (725,000)         (+88,646)  ................
Environmental compliance and restoration......................           16,927            17,000            17,000               +73   ................
Alteration of bridges.........................................           15,466   ................           14,000            -1,466           +14,000
Retired pay...................................................          876,346           889,000           889,000           +12,654   ................
Reserve training..............................................           83,194            86,522            86,522            +3,328   ................
Research, development, test, and evaluation...................           20,222            22,000            22,000            +1,778   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Coast Guard......................................        5,239,659         6,057,978         5,771,978          +532,319          -286,000
              (By transfer)...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
          Offset for new user fees............................  ................         -165,000   ................  ................         +165,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................        5,239,659         5,892,978         5,771,978          +532,319          -121,000
                Federal Aviation Administration
Operations....................................................        6,886,000         7,077,203         7,081,203          +195,203            +4,000
    Air traffic services......................................       (5,452,871)  ................       (5,696,037)        (+243,166)      (+5,696,037)
    Aviation regulation and certification.....................         (768,769)  ................         (839,467)         (+70,698)        (+839,467)
    Civil aviation security...................................         (150,154)  ................  ................        (-150,154)  ................
    Research and acquisition..................................         (195,799)  ................         (207,600)         (+11,801)        (+207,600)
    Commercial space transportation...........................          (12,456)  ................          (12,325)            (-131)         (+12,325)
    Financial services........................................          (50,284)  ................          (48,782)          (-1,502)         (+48,782)
    Human resources...........................................          (69,516)  ................          (80,260)         (+10,744)         (+80,260)
    Regional coordination.....................................          (85,943)  ................          (82,192)          (-3,751)         (+82,192)
    Staff offices.............................................         (109,208)  ................         (114,540)          (+5,332)        (+114,540)
    Undistributed.............................................          (-9,000)  ................  ................          (+9,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................       (6,886,000)  ................       (7,081,203)        (+195,203)      (+7,081,203)
    Emergency supplemental....................................          200,000   ................  ................         -200,000   ................
Facilities & equipment (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)..........        2,914,000         2,981,022         2,981,022           +67,022   ................
    Rescission (Airport and Airway Trust Fund)................          -15,000   ................  ................          +15,000   ................
    Emergency supplemental....................................          108,500   ................  ................         -108,500   ................
Research, engineering, and development (Airport and Airway              195,000           124,000           124,000           -71,000   ................
 Trust Fund)..................................................
    Emergency supplemental....................................           50,000   ................  ................          -50,000   ................
Grants-in-aid for airports (Airport and Airway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization)...................       (1,800,000)       (3,100,000)       (3,100,000)      (+1,300,000)  ................
    (Limitation on obligations)...............................       (3,300,000)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+100,000)  ................
    Rescission of contract authorization......................         -301,720   ................  ................         +301,720   ................
    Emergency supplemental....................................          175,000   ................  ................         -175,000   ................
    Small community air service pilot program(non-add)........          (20,000)  ................          (20,000)  ................         (+20,000)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Net subtotal............................................       (3,173,280)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+226,720)  ................
Aviation insurance revolving fund.............................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Essential air service (by transfer)...........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Federal Aviation Administration..................       10,528,500        10,182,225        10,186,225          -342,275            +4,000
          (Limitations on obligations)........................       (3,300,000)       (3,400,000)       (3,400,000)        (+100,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources.........................      (13,828,500)      (13,582,225)      (13,586,225)        (-242,275)          (+4,000)
          Rescissions.........................................         -316,720   ................  ................         +316,720   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................      (13,511,780)      (13,582,225)      (13,586,225)         (+74,445)          (+4,000)
                Federal Highway Administration
Limitation on administrative expenses.........................         (311,000)         (317,732)         (317,732)          (+6,732)  ................
Federal-aid highways (Highway Trust Fund): \1\
    (Limitation on obligations)...............................      (27,280,000)      (27,537,787)      (31,800,000)      (+4,520,000)      (+4,262,213)
    Revenue aligned budget authority (RABA)...................       (4,543,000)      (-4,369,000)  ................      (-4,543,000)      (+4,369,000)
    RABA transfer to FMCSA....................................         (-23,896)  ................  ................         (+23,896)  ................
Border enforcement program (non-add)..........................  ................  ................         (106,967)        (+106,967)        (+106,967)
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, limitation on obligations.....................      (31,799,104)      (23,168,787)      (31,800,000)            (+896)      (+8,631,213)
    (Exempt obligations)......................................         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
    (Liquidation of contract authorization)...................      (30,000,000)      (29,000,000)      (32,000,000)      (+2,000,000)      (+3,000,000)
Appalachian development highway system........................          200,000   ................          200,000   ................         +200,000
State infrastructure banks (rescission).......................           -5,750   ................  ................           +5,750   ................
Value pricing project (rescission) (Highway Trust Fund) (sec.            -9,231   ................  ................           +9,231   ................
 318).........................................................
TIFIA (rescission) (Highway Trust Fund) (sec. 318)............          -43,742   ................  ................          +43,742   ................
Miscellaneous appropriations (Highway Trust Fund) (emergency            100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
 supplemental)................................................
Emergency relief program (emergency supplemental).............           75,000   ................  ................          -75,000   ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Federal Highway Administration...................          375,000   ................          200,000          -175,000          +200,000
          (Limitations on obligations)........................      (31,799,104)      (23,168,787)      (31,800,000)            (+896)      (+8,631,213)
          (Exempt obligations)................................         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources.........................      (33,139,412)      (24,061,554)      (32,892,767)        (-246,645)      (+8,831,213)
          Rescissions.........................................          -58,723   ................  ................          +58,723   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................      (33,080,689)      (24,061,554)      (32,892,767)        (-187,922)      (+8,831,213)
          Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Motor carrier safety (limitation on administrative expenses)           (110,000)         (114,464)         (114,464)          (+4,464)  ................
 (limitation on obligations)..................................
    Rescission................................................           -6,665   ................  ................           +6,665   ................
National motor carrier safety program (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization)...................         (205,896)         (190,000)         (190,000)         (-15,896)  ................
    (Limitation on obligations)...............................         (182,000)         (190,000)         (190,000)          (+8,000)  ................
    RABA transfer from FHWA:
        Border-State grants...................................          (18,000)  ................  ................         (-18,000)  ................
        State commercial driver's license.....................           (5,896)  ................  ................          (-5,896)  ................
        Motor carrier safety assistance grants................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, RABA......................................          (23,896)  ................  ................         (-23,896)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, limitation on obligations.................         (205,896)         (190,000)         (190,000)         (-15,896)  ................
Border enforcement program (Highway Trust Fund)...............           25,866            59,967   ................          -25,866           -59,967
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin...............           25,866            59,967   ................          -25,866           -59,967
          (Limitations on obligations)........................         (315,896)         (304,464)         (304,464)         (-11,432)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources.........................         (341,762)         (364,431)         (304,464)         (-37,298)         (-59,967)
          Rescissions.........................................           -6,665   ................  ................           +6,665   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................         (335,097)         (364,431)         (304,464)         (-30,633)         (-59,967)
        National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Operations and research.......................................          127,780           126,445           141,000           +13,220           +14,555
Operations and research (Highway trust fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization)...................          (72,000)          (72,000)          (72,000)  ................  ................
    (Limitation on obligations)...............................          (72,000)          (72,000)          (72,000)  ................  ................
    Rescission of contract authority..........................           -1,516   ................  ................           +1,516   ................
National Driver Register (Highway trust fund).................            2,000             2,000             2,000   ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Operations and research.......................         (200,264)         (200,445)         (215,000)         (+14,736)         (+14,555)
Highway traffic safety grants (Highway Trust Fund):
    (Liquidation of contract authorization)...................         (223,000)         (225,000)         (225,000)          (+2,000)  ................
    (Limitation on obligations):
        Highway safety programs (Sec. 402)....................         (160,000)         (165,000)         (165,000)          (+5,000)  ................
        Occupant protection incentive grants (Sec. 405).......          (15,000)          (20,000)          (20,000)          (+5,000)  ................
        Alcohol-impaired driving countermeasures grants (Sec.           (38,000)          (40,000)          (40,000)          (+2,000)  ................
         410).................................................
        State highway safety data grants (Sec. 411)...........          (10,000)  ................  ................         (-10,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
          Subtotal, limitation on obligations.................         (223,000)         (225,000)         (225,000)          (+2,000)  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
          Total, National Highway Traffic Safety Admin........          129,780           128,445           143,000           +13,220           +14,555
              (Limitations on obligations)....................         (295,000)         (297,000)         (297,000)          (+2,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Total budgetary resources.....................         (424,780)         (425,445)         (440,000)         (+15,220)         (+14,555)
              Rescissions.....................................           -1,516   ................  ................           +1,516   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Net total.....................................         (423,264)         (425,445)         (440,000)         (+16,736)         (+14,555)
                Federal Railroad Administration
Safety and operations.........................................          110,857           118,264           118,264            +7,407   ................
    Offset for new user fees..................................  ................          -45,000   ................  ................          +45,000
    Emergency supplemental....................................            6,000   ................  ................           -6,000   ................
Railroad research and development.............................           29,000            28,325            29,325              +325            +1,000
    Offset for new user fees..................................  ................          -14,000   ................  ................          +14,000
Pennsylvania Station Redevelopment project (advance                      20,000            20,000            20,000   ................  ................
 appropriations, fiscal year 2001, fiscal year 2002, fiscal
 year 2003)...................................................
Next generation high-speed rail...............................           32,300            23,200            30,000            -2,300            +6,800
Alaska Railroad rehabilitation................................           20,000   ................           25,000            +5,000           +25,000
Grants to the National Railroad Passenger Corporation.........          521,476           521,476         1,200,000          +678,524          +678,524
    Emergency supplemental....................................          100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, Federal Railroad Administration..................          839,633           711,265         1,422,589          +582,956          +711,324
          Offset for new user fees............................  ................          -59,000   ................  ................          +59,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................          839,633           652,265         1,422,589          +582,956          +770,324
                Federal Transit Administration
Administrative expenses.......................................           13,400            14,600            14,600            +1,200   ................
Administrative expenses (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit               (53,600)          (58,400)          (58,400)          (+4,800)  ................
 Account) (limitation on obligations).........................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Administrative expenses.......................          (67,000)          (73,000)          (73,000)          (+6,000)  ................
Formula grants................................................          718,400           767,800           767,800           +49,400   ................
    Emergency supplemental....................................           23,500   ................  ................          -23,500   ................
Formula grants (Highway Trust Fund) (limitation on                   (2,873,600)       (3,071,200)       (3,071,200)        (+197,600)  ................
 obligations).................................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Formula grants................................       (3,615,500)       (3,839,000)       (3,839,000)        (+223,500)  ................
University transportation research............................            1,200             1,200             1,200   ................  ................
University transportation research (Highway Trust Fund, Mass             (4,800)           (4,800)           (4,800)  ................  ................
 Transit Acct) (limitation on obligations)....................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, University transportation research............           (6,000)           (6,000)           (6,000)  ................  ................
Transit planning and research.................................           23,000            24,200            24,200            +1,200   ................
Transit planning and research (Highway Trust Fund, Mass                 (93,000)          (97,800)          (97,800)          (+4,800)  ................
 Transit Account) (limitation on obligations).................
    Flexible funding..........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Transit planning and research.................         (116,000)         (122,000)         (122,000)          (+6,000)  ................
    Rural transportation assistance...........................           (5,250)           (5,250)           (5,250)  ................  ................
    National Transit Institute................................           (4,000)           (4,000)           (4,000)  ................  ................
    Transit cooperative research..............................           (8,250)           (8,250)           (8,250)  ................  ................
    Metropolitan planning.....................................          (55,422)          (60,386)          (60,386)          (+4,964)  ................
    State planning............................................          (11,578)          (12,614)          (12,614)          (+1,036)  ................
    National planning and research............................          (31,500)          (31,500)          (31,500)  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................         (116,000)         (122,000)         (122,000)          (+6,000)  ................
Trust fund share of expenses (Highway Trust Fund) (liquidation       (5,397,800)       (5,781,000)       (5,781,000)        (+383,200)  ................
 of contract authorization)...................................
Capital investment grants.....................................          568,200           607,200           607,200           +39,000   ................
Capital investment grants (General purpose)...................  ................  ................          100,000          +100,000          +100,000
    Emergency supplemental....................................          100,000   ................  ................         -100,000   ................
Capital investment grants (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit          (2,272,800)       (2,428,800)       (2,428,800)        (+156,000)  ................
 Account) (limitation on obligations).........................
    Flexible funding..........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Capital investment grants.....................       (2,941,000)       (3,036,000)       (3,136,000)        (+195,000)        (+100,000)
    Fixed guideway modernization..............................       (1,136,400)       (1,214,400)       (1,214,400)         (+78,000)  ................
    Buses and bus-related facilities..........................         (568,200)         (607,200)         (607,200)         (+39,000)  ................
    New starts................................................       (1,136,400)       (1,214,400)       (1,214,400)         (+78,000)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal................................................       (2,841,000)       (3,036,000)       (3,036,000)        (+195,000)  ................
Job access and reverse commute grants.........................           25,000            30,000            30,000            +5,000   ................
    (Highway Trust Fund, Mass Transit Account) (limitation on          (100,000)         (120,000)         (120,000)         (+20,000)  ................
     obligations).............................................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Job access and reverse commute grants.........         (125,000)         (150,000)         (150,000)         (+25,000)  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Federal Transit Administration...................        1,472,700         1,445,000         1,545,000           +72,300          +100,000
          (Limitations on obligations)........................       (5,397,800)       (5,781,000)       (5,781,000)        (+383,200)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Total budgetary resources.........................       (6,870,500)       (7,226,000)       (7,326,000)        (+455,500)        (+100,000)
         Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation
Operations and maintenance (Harbor Maintenance Trust Fund)....           13,345            14,086            13,345   ................             -741
         Research and Special Programs Administration
Research and special programs:
    Hazardous materials safety................................           21,217            23,079            23,079            +1,862   ................
    Offset for new user fees..................................  ................           -6,000   ................  ................           +6,000
    Emergency transportation..................................            1,897             2,058             2,058              +161   ................
    Research and technology...................................            2,784             2,854             2,854               +70   ................
    Program and administrative support........................           11,381            16,387            15,734            +4,353              -653
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, research and special programs.................           37,279            38,378            43,725            +6,446            +5,347
    Emergency supplemental (emergency trans)..................            2,500   ................  ................           -2,500   ................
Pipeline safety:
    Pipeline Safety Fund......................................           50,386            56,385            56,385            +5,999   ................
    Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund............................            7,864             7,472             7,472              -392   ................
    Pipeline safety reserve...................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Subtotal, Pipeline safety program (incl reserve)........           58,250            63,857            63,857            +5,607   ................
Emergency preparedness grants:
    Emergency preparedness fund...............................              200               200               200   ................  ................
    Limitation on emergency preparedness fund.................          (14,300)          (14,300)          (14,300)  ................  ................
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, Research and Special Programs Admin..............           98,229           108,435           107,782            +9,553              -653
          Rescission..........................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total.........................................           98,229           108,435           107,782            +9,553              -653
                  Office of Inspector General
Salaries and expenses.........................................           50,614            57,421            57,421            +6,807   ................
    Emergency supplemental....................................            1,300   ................  ................           -1,300   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................           51,914            57,421            57,421            +5,507   ................
                 Surface Transportation Board
Salaries and expenses.........................................           18,457            19,459            19,459            +1,002   ................
    Offsetting collections....................................             -950            -1,000            -1,000               -50   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................           17,507            18,459            18,459              +952   ................
              Bureau of Transportation Statistics
Office of Airline Information (Airport & Airway Trust Fund)...  ................            3,965   ................  ................           -3,965
                      General Provisions
Amtrak Reform Council (Sec. 329)..............................              225   ................  ................             -225   ................
Alaska highway obligation adjustment..........................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
Surface transportation projects (sec. 330) (sec. 1106)........          148,300   ................          160,000           +11,700          +160,000
Restoration of contract authorization (Sec. ____).............  ................  ................          200,000          +200,000          +200,000
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total, General provisions...............................          148,525   ................          360,000          +211,475          +360,000
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Net total, title I, Department of Transportation........       18,827,005        20,724,006        22,173,468        +3,346,463        +1,449,462
          Appropriations......................................      (17,914,879)      (20,724,006)      (22,173,468)      (+4,258,589)      (+1,449,462)
          Emergency...........................................       (1,295,750)  ................  ................      (-1,295,750)  ................
          Offset for new user fees............................      (-1,250,000)        (-230,000)  ................      (+1,250,000)        (+230,000)
          Rescission of contract authority....................        (-303,236)  ................  ................        (+303,236)  ................
          (By transfer).......................................  ................  ................  ................  ................  ................
          (Limitations on obligations)........................      (41,107,800)      (32,951,251)      (41,582,464)        (+474,664)      (+8,631,213)
          (Exempt obligations)................................         (965,308)         (892,767)         (892,767)         (-72,541)  ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
            Net total budgetary resources.....................      (60,900,113)      (54,568,024)      (64,648,699)      (+3,748,586)     (+10,080,675)
                                                               =========================================================================================
                  TITLE II--RELATED AGENCIES
  Architectural and Transportation Barriers Compliance Board
Salaries and expenses.........................................            5,015             5,194             5,194              +179   ................
             National Transportation Safety Board
Salaries and expenses.........................................           68,000            70,480            72,500            +4,500            +2,020
    Emergency supplemental....................................              650   ................  ................             -650   ................
                                                               -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
      Total...................................................           68,650            70,480            72,500            +3,850            +2,020
                                                               =========================================================================================
      Total, title II, Related Agencies.......................           73,665            75,674            77,694            +4,029            +2,020
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Reflects pending amendment.



