[Federal Register Volume 64, Number 67 (Thursday, April 8, 1999)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17210-17214]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 99-8569]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Highway Administration

Federal Transit Administration


Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century; Implementation 
Information for the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Deployment 
Program

AGENCIES: Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This document publishes implementation information on the

[[Page 17211]]

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Deployment Program described 
in sections 5208 and 5209 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st 
Century (TEA-21), enacted on June 9, 1998. The notice identifies the 
criteria for the two components of the ITS Deployment Program, namely 
the ITS Integration Program and the Commercial Vehicle Intelligent 
Transportation Infrastructure Deployment Program. Implementation 
information on this program was issued to the FHWA Division and the FTA 
Regional Offices on January 4, 1999, and is contained in this notice.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  For the ITS Integration component of 
the ITS Deployment Program: Ms. Toni Wilbur, FHWA Office of Travel 
Management, HOTM, (202) 366-2199; or Mr. Ron Boenau, FTA Office of 
Mobility Innovation, TRI-11, (202) 366-0195; for the Commercial Vehicle 
ITS Infrastructure Deployment component of the ITS Deployment Program: 
Mr. Steve Crane, FHWA Office of Motor Carrier and Highway Safety, HMTE, 
(202) 366-0950; for legal issues: Mr. Wilbert Baccus, HCC-32, FHWA 
Office of the Chief Counsel (202) 366-0780; or Linda Sorkin, TCC-24, 
FTA Office of the Chief Counsel, (202) 366-1936, 400 Seventh Street 
SW., Washington, DC. 20590. FHWA office hours are from 7:45 a.m. to 
4:15 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. FTA 
office hours are from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m., e.t., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Access

    An electronic copy of this document may be downloaded using a modem 
and suitable communications software from the Government Printing 
Office Electronic Bulletin Board Service at (202) 512-1661. Internet 
users may reach the Federal Register's home page at: http://
www.nara.gov/fedreg and the Government Printing Office's database at: 
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara.

Background

    The TEA-21 (Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 107) implementation material 
published in this notice is provided for informational purposes only. 
Specific questions on any of the material published in this notice 
should be directed to the contact persons named in the caption FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT for this program.
    This implementation information applies to ITS projects in areas 
designated in either the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency 
Supplemental Appropriations Act, 1999 (Pub. L. 105-277, 112 Stat. 2681) 
or in section 5208(g) of TEA-21. Although the locations and funding 
amounts for the ITS Deployment Program have been designated by 
Congress, specific projects must contribute to the integration and 
interoperability of intelligent transportation systems, consistent with 
the criteria set forth in TEA-21.
    Section 5208 of TEA-21 establishes the ITS Integration Program to 
accelerate the integration and interoperability of ITS systems in both 
metropolitan and rural areas, and provides criteria for the selection 
of projects that will support this goal. These criteria include the 
demonstration of a strong commitment to cooperation among agencies, 
jurisdictions, and the private sector, and a commitment to a 
comprehensive plan of fully integrated intelligent transportation 
system deployment in accordance with the national ITS architecture and 
standards. Public-private partnerships are encouraged, including 
arrangements that generate revenue to offset public investment costs 
and minimize the relative percentage and amount of Federal ITS funding. 
All ITS Integration Program projects must be part of approved plans and 
programs developed under applicable statewide and metropolitan 
transportation planning processes and applicable State air quality 
implementation plans, as appropriate, at the time at which Federal 
funds are sought. In addition, funding recipients must demonstrate a 
commitment to the long-term operations, management and maintenance of 
the system without continued reliance on Federal ITS funding.
    The purpose of the Commercial Vehicle Intelligent Transportation 
Infrastructure Deployment Program, as described in section 5209 of TEA-
21, is to improve the safety and productivity of commercial vehicles 
and drivers, and to reduce the costs associated with commercial vehicle 
operations and Federal and State commercial vehicle regulatory 
requirements. TEA-21 establishes criteria for identifying priority 
areas and encourages multistate cooperation and corridor development to 
improve the safety of commercial vehicle operations. Activities funded 
under the Commercial Vehicle Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure 
Deployment Program should advance the use of technology to increase the 
efficiency of the regulatory inspection processes, reduce 
administrative burdens, facilitate commercial vehicle inspections, and 
generally increase the effectiveness of enforcement efforts. Funds can 
also be used to enhance the safe passage of commercial vehicles across 
the United States and across international borders.
    The FHWA and the FTA are publishing this notice to provide 
information to the public on the activities and/or projects that are 
eligible for funding under the ITS Deployment Program, the locations 
and amounts of funding, and how the TEA-21 criteria will be met for the 
candidate projects to be funded.

(Authority: 23 U.S.C. 315; sec. 5208, Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 
458, (23 U.S.C. 502 nt.); sec. 5209, Pub. L. 105-178, 112 Stat. 460, 
(23 U.S.C. 502 nt.); 49 CFR 1.48).

    Issued on: March 31, 1999.
Kenneth R. Wykle,
Federal Highway Administrator.

Gordon J. Linton,
Federal Transit Administrator.
    The text of the FHWA and the FTA implementation guidelines 
memorandum follows: January 4, 1999 (HTV-3, TOA-2)
    ACTION: Notification of Participation in the TEA-21 ITS Deployment 
Program, FHWA Deputy Administrator, FTA Deputy Administrator, FHWA 
Division Administrators, FTA Regional Administrators, Motor Carrier 
State Directors.
    This is to notify you that areas within your State or region have 
been identified to participate in the Intelligent Transportation 
Systems (ITS) Deployment Program based on designations contained in 
either the Omnibus Consolidated and Emergency Supplemental 
Appropriations Act, 1999, or in Section 5208(g)(2) of the 
Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century (TEA-21).
    While the FY 1999 Appropriations Act specifies the locations and 
amounts of funding, it does not designate specific projects to be 
funded. Rather, the Conference Report accompanying the FY 1999 
Appropriations Act specifies that projects selected for funding 
``contribute to the integration and interoperability of intelligent 
transportation systems consistent with the criteria set forth in TEA-
21.''
    The ITS Deployment Program authorized in TEA-21 includes two 
components. The ITS Integration component of the ITS Deployment Program 
is described in section 5208 of TEA-21. This program provides Federal 
ITS funding for the integration of multimodal ITS components in a 
variety of settings, including large regional or multi-State areas, 
metropolitan areas, and rural areas. Specific project

[[Page 17212]]

selection criteria are included in TEA-21.
    The Commercial Vehicle Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure 
Deployment component of the ITS Deployment Program is described in 
section 5209 of TEA-21. This program provides Federal ITS funding to 
support the goal Congress established in TEA-21 to complete deployment 
of Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) in a 
majority of States by September 30, 2003.
    Progress towards this goal can only be achieved if those States 
designated in the FY 99 Appropriations Act use all or some of their 
funding to advance towards CVISN Level 1 Capabilities in their State.
    Because this is a multimodal program, it will require close 
cooperation among FHWA Federal-aid and Motor Carrier staff, FHWA 
division offices and resource centers, FTA regional office staff and 
the appropriate headquarters offices. Areas designated for ITS 
Deployment Program funding will be required to submit project 
descriptions specifying the proposed use of these funds and indicating 
how the TEA-21 criteria will be met. We are finalizing guidance 
materials to assist you in working with the State and local agencies to 
implement the ITS Deployment Program. This material will be provided to 
you in the near future. It should be shared and discussed with the 
highway and transit officials in the State departments of 
transportation, and the appropriate local highway, transit, and 
metropolitan planning organizations as soon as possible after you 
receive it.
    Attached is a list of the areas and the congressionally designated 
amounts contained in the FY 1999 Appropriations Act. As explained in 
the attachment, the actual amounts of funding available are less than 
the amount designated. This is due to the obligation limitation, the 
fact that the total amount of appropriation and authorization earmarks 
exceeds the TEA-21 program authorization, and the need to provide 
funding for national evaluations as specified in TEA-21.
    Thank you in advance for your assistance in this important 
departmental initiative. If you have any questions about the ITS 
Deployment Program, please call Ms. Toni Wilbur, Federal Highway 
Administration (FHWA), (202) 366-2199; Mr. Ron Boenau, Federal Transit 
Administration (FTA), (202) 366-0195; or Mr. Steve Crane, FHWA Office 
of Motor Carrier and Highway Safety, (202) 366-0950.

    /s/ signed by:
Nuria I. Fernandez.
    /s/ signed by:
 Gloria J. Jeff.

Attachment 1

December 23, 1998

FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION
FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION
INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS
FY 1999 FUNDING FOR CONGRESSIONALLY DESIGNATED PROJECTS

Congressionally Designated Amounts Versus Amounts Authorized

    FY 1999 Congressional designations against the ITS Deployment 
Program total $114.8 million; $9.8 million in TEA-21, and $105 million 
in the FY 1999 DOT Appropriation Act (see column 2 of the attached 
worksheet). However, TEA-21 only authorizes $105 million for the ITS 
Deployment Program in FY 1999. Thus, the $114.8 million in 
Congressionally designated projects exceeds the FY 1999 available 
amount of $105.0 billion by $9.8 million. To adjust the Congressionally 
designated amounts downward to the authorized level, each 
Congressionally designated project was necessarily reduced by 
approximately 8.5% (see column 3 of the attached worksheet).

Reductions Required by Section 1102(f) of TEA-21

    The ITS Program is not only subject to the overall obligation 
limitation on Federal-aid Highways but is also subject to proportional 
distribution of that limitation. In FY 1999, each State and/or program 
subject to the distribution of the FY 1999 Obligation Limitation 
receives an obligation limitation equal to 88.3% of the amounts 
``authorized'' for FY 1999.
    Basically, section 1102(f) states that any amounts for 
``allocated'' programs which cannot be obligated within the distributed 
obligation limitation will be taken away from these programs and 
redistributed to the States. Implementation of this section will reduce 
the ITS Deployment Program from $105 million to $92.715 million, a 
reduction of 11.7%. This mandated 11.7% reduction ($12.285 million) has 
been applied proportionately to each Congressionally designated project 
as reflected in Column 5 of the attached worksheet.

Reductions for Project Evaluations

    Section 5204(j) requires the Secretary to issue guidelines and 
requirements to ensure that independent evaluations will be made on ITS 
operational tests and deployment projects. This section also directs 
the establishment of evaluation funding to ensure adequate evaluations 
are carried out.
    For fiscal year 1999, all ITS Deployment Program funding recipients 
will be required to conduct an evaluation that is locally funded and 
executed. Cross-cutting assessments of these local evaluations will be 
conducted by the ITS Joint Program Office and will include gathering 
data and disseminating results. More details on the scope of local 
evaluations will be included in the forthcoming ITS Deployment Program 
guidance materials.
    In-depth, independent evaluations of selected projects of national 
significance (as determined by the ITS Joint Program Office), will also 
be required. Funding for the evaluations of significant projects will 
be derived by pooling 2% of each project amount (see Column 7 of the 
attached worksheet). Please note that projects III and IV on the 
attached worksheet were funded from the ITS Deployment Program in TEA-
21, but are exempt from the evaluation requirement since they are 
research projects, not ITS operational tests or deployments.

Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks (CVISN) (See Column 
9)

    In TEA-21 Congress established a goal to complete deployment of 
CVISN in a majority of States by September 30, 2003. The FHWA's State 
CVISN Level 1 deployment strategy consists of three key steps: 
Planning, Design, and Implementation and Deployment. Our strategy for 
States to achieve this goal will require the use of all or a portion of 
1999 funds to complete at a minimum the next step. The first step, 
Planning, includes participation in two ITS/CVO training courses and 
the development of an ITS/CVO State business plan. This step is 
essential to promote ITS/CVO awareness and coalition building among the 
State agencies involved in CVO and with industry. This step is 
estimated to require a minimum of $50 thousand of Federal ITS Funds. 
The focus of the second step, Design, is for the State to establish its 
CVISN project team, including at a minimum a CVISN project manager and 
a system architect. Once these individuals have been selected, a State 
can participate in the Understanding ITS/CVO Technology training course 
and in three CVISN

[[Page 17213]]

workshops. These activities will assist the State in developing its 
CVISN Project Plan and Top-Level Design. This step is estimated to 
require at least $350 thousand of Federal ITS Funds. The final step is 
the Implementation and Deployment of CVISN Level 1 Capabilities. The 
total amount of Federal ITS Funds for the three steps is $3 million. 
This represents the 50% ITS Federal share of the estimated $6 to $10 
million total cost, based on CVISN project plans submitted by the 
participating Pilot States. Column 9 lists the minimum amount of FY 99 
funds that are needed to support the completion of the next step for 
States identified in the Congressional designations. Note, the States 
of Minnesota, Maryland, and Washington (in partnership with Oregon) 
have already received Federal ITS deployment funding prior to FY 99. 
The minimum amount available for the State of Minnesota is $2,000,000, 
for the State of Maryland is $1,976,673.76, and for the State of 
Washington is $1,582,939.02 to complete the third step.

                                       Federal Highway Administration / Federal Transit Administration--Analysis of FY 1999 Its Deployment Program Funding
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                          Column 2          Column 3                       Column 5 Section                       Column 7                                          Column 10
                                       Congressionally    Designations    Column 4 Total        1102(f)          Column 6         Project          Column 8         Column 9      Available for
          Column 1 Project               Designated          Exceed         Authorized         Reduction         Subtotal        Evaluation     Adjusted Total    Minimum for      Integration
                                           Amounts       Authorizations                         (11.7%)                        Reduction (2%)     Available          CVISN           Projects
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
TEA--21 Earmarks:                        $9,800,000.00    ($836,585.37)     $8,963,414.63   ($1,048,719.51)    $7,914,695.12    ($113,067.07)    $7,801,628.05            $0.00    $7,801,628.05
    1. Great Lakes ITS                    2,000,000.00     (170,731.71)      1,829,268.29      (214,024.39)     1,615,243.90      (32,304.88)     1,582,939.02             0.00     1,582,939.02
     Implementation.................
    2. Northeast ITS Implementation.      5,000,000.00     (426,829.27)      4,573,170.73      (535,060.98)     4,038,109.76      (80,762.20)     3,957,347.56             0.00     3,957,347.56
    3. Haz. Mat. Monitoring Systems.      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93             0.00     1,211,432.93             0.00     1,211,432.93
    4. Translink--Texas Transp. Inst      1,300,000.00     (110,975.61)      1,189,024.39      (139,115.85)     1,049,908.54             0.00     1,049,908.54             0.00     1,049,908.54
FY 1999 Appropriation Act;              105,000,000.00   (8,963,414.63)     96,036,585.37   (11,236,280.49)    84,800,304.88   (1,696,006.10)    83,104,298.78     9,861,612.80    73,242,685.98
    1. Amherst, Massachusetts.......      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    2. Arlington County, Virginia...        750,000.00      (64,024.39)        685,975.61       (80,259.15)       605,716.46      (12,114.33)       593,602.13             0.00       593,602.13
    3. Atlanta, Georgia.............      2,000,000.00     (170,731.71)      1,829,268.29      (214,024.39)     1,615,243.90      (32,304.88)     1,582,939.02             0.00     1,582,939.02
    4. Brandon, Vermont.............        375,000.00      (32,012.20)        342,987.80       (40,129.57)       302,858.23       (6,057.16)       296,801.07             0.00       296,801.07
    5. Buffalo, New York............        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    6. Centre Valley, Pennsylvania..        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    7. Cleveland, Ohio..............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    8. Columbus, Ohio...............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    9. Corpus Christi, Texas........        900,000.00      (76,829.27)        823,170.73       (96,310.98)       726,859.76      (14,537.20)       712,322.56             0.00       712,322.56
    10. Dade County, Florida........      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    11. Del Rio, Texas..............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    12. Delaware River, Pennsylvania      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    13. Fairfield, California.......      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    14. Fitchburg, Massachusetts....        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    15. Greater Metro. Region--DC...      5,000,000.00     (426,829.27)      4,573,170.73      (535,060.98)     4,038,109.76      (80,762.20)     3,957,347.56             0.00     3,957,347.56
    16. Hammond, Louisiana..........      4,000,000.00     (341,463.41)      3,658,536.59      (428,048.78)     3,230,487.80      (64,609.76)     3,165,878.05             0.00     3,165,878.05
    17. Houston, Texas..............      2,000,000.00     (170,731.71)      1,829,268.29      (214,024.39)     1,615,243.90      (32,304.88)     1,582,939.02             0.00     1,582,939.02
    18. Huntington Beach, California      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    19. Huntsville, Alabama.........      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    20. Inglewood, California.......      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27             0.00     1,187,204.27
    21. Jackson, Mississippi........      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    22. Kansas City, Missouri.......        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    23. Laredo, Texas...............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    24. Middlesboro, Kentucky.......      3,000,000.00     (256,097.56)      2,743,902.44      (321,036.59)     2,422,865.85      (48,457.32)     2,374,408.54             0.00     2,374,408.54
    25. Mission Viejo, California...      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    26. Mobile, Alabama.............      2,500,000.00     (213,414.63)      2,286,585.37      (267,530.49)     2,019,054.88      (40,381.10)     1,978,673.78             0.00     1,978,673.78
    27. Monroe County, New York.....        400,000.00      (34,146.34)        365,853.66       (42,804.88)       323,048.78       (6,460.98)       316,587.80             0.00       316,587.80
    28. Montgomery, Alabama.........      1,250,000.00     (106,707.32)      1,143,292.68      (133,765.24)     1,009,527.44      (20,190.55)       989,336.89             0.00       989,336.89
    29. Nashville, Tennessee........        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    30. New Orleans, Louisiana......      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27             0.00     1,187,204.27
    31. New York City, New York.....      2,500,000.00     (213,414.63)      2,286,585.37      (267,530.49)     2,019,054.88      (40,381.10)     1,978,673.78             0.00     1,978,673.78
    32. New York/Long Island, NY....      2,300,000.00     (196,341.46)      2,103,658.54      (246,128.05)     1,857,530.49      (37,150.61)     1,820,379.88             0.00     1,820,379.88
    33. Oakland County, Michigan....      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    34. Onandaga County, New York...        400,000.00      (34,146.34)        365,853.66       (42,804.88)       323,048.78       (6,460.98)       316,587.80             0.00       316,587.80
    35. Port Angeles, Washington....        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    36. Raleigh-Wake County, NC.....      2,000,000.00     (170,731.71)      1,829,268.29      (214,024.39)     1,615,243.90      (32,304.88)     1,582,939.02             0.00     1,582,939.02
    37. Riverside, California.......      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    38. San Francisco, California...      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27             0.00     1,187,204.27
    39. Scranton, Pennsylvania......      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    40. Silicon Valley, California..      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27             0.00     1,187,204.27
    41. Spokane, Washington.........        450,000.00      (38,414.63)        411,585.37       (48,155.49)       363,429.88       (7,268.60)       356,161.28             0.00       356,161.28
    42. Springfield, Virginia.......        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    43. St. Louis, Missouri.........        750,000.00      (64,024.39)        685,975.61       (80,259.15)       605,716.46      (12,114.33)       593,602.13             0.00       593,602.13
    44. State of Alaska.............      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27       350,000.00       837,204.27
    45. State of Idaho..............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51       350,000.00       441,469.51
    46. State of Maryland...........      2,500,000.00     (213,414.63)      2,286,585.37      (267,530.49)     2,019,054.88      (40,381.10)     1,978,673.78     1,978,673.78             0.00
    47. State of Minnesota..........      7,100,000.00     (606,097.56)      6,493,902.44      (759,786.59)     5,734,115.85     (114,682.32)     5,619,433.54     2,000,000.00     3,619,433.54
    48. State of Mississippi........      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51       350,000.00       441,469.51
    49. State of Missouri...........        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76       350,000.00        45,734.76
    50. State of Montana............        700,000.00      (59,756.10)        640,243.90       (74,908.54)       565,335.37      (11,306.71)       554,028.66       350,000.00       204,028.66
    51. State of Nevada.............        575,000.00      (49,085.37)        525,914.63       (61,532.01)       464,382.62       (9,287.65)       455,094.97       350,000.00       105,094.97
    52. State of New Jersey.........      3,000,000.00     (256,097.56)      2,743,902.44      (321,036.59)     2,422,865.85      (48,457.32)     2,374,408.54       350,000.00     2,024,408.54
    53. State of New Mexico.........      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51       350,000.00       441,469.51
    54. State of New York...........      2,500,000.00     (213,414.63)      2,286,585.37      (267,530.49)     2,019,054.88      (40,381.10)     1,978,673.78       350,000.00     1,628,673.78
    55. State of North Dakota.......      1,450,000.00     (123,780.49)      1,326,219.51      (155,167.68)     1,171,051.83      (23,421.04)     1,147,630.79        50,000.00     1,097,630.79
    56. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania     14,000,000.00   (1,195,121.95)     12,804,878.05    (1,498,170.73)    11,306,707.32     (226,134.15)    11,080,573.17       350,000.00    10,730,573.17
    57. State of Texas..............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51        50,000.00       741,469.51
    58. State of Utah...............      3,600,000.00     (307,317.07)      3,292,682.93      (385,243.90)     2,907,439.02      (58,148.78)     2,849,290.24       350,000.00     2,499,290.24
    59. State of Washington.........      2,000,000.00     (170,731.71)      1,829,268.29      (214,024.39)     1,615,243.90      (32,304.88)     1,582,939.02     1,582,939.02             0.00
    60. State of Wisconsin..........      1,500,000.00     (128,048.78)      1,371,951.22      (160,518.29)     1,211,432.93      (24,228.66)     1,187,204.27       350,000.00       837,204.27
    61. Temucula, California........        250,000.00      (21,341.46)        228,658.54       (26,753.05)       201,905.49       (4,038.11)       197,867.38             0.00       197,867.38
    62. Tucson, Arizona.............      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    63. Volusia County, Florida.....      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    64. Warren County, Virginia.....        250,000.00      (21,341.46)        228,658.54       (26,753.05)       201,905.49       (4,038.11)       197,867.38             0.00       197,867.38
    65. Wausau-Stevens Point, WI....      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.51             0.00       791,469.51
    66. Westchester/Putnam Co., NY..        500,000.00      (42,682.93)        457,317.07       (53,506.10)       403,810.98       (8,076.22)       395,734.76             0.00       395,734.76
    67. White Plains, New York......      1,000,000.00      (85,365.85)        914,634.15      (107,012.20)       807,621.95      (16,152.44)       791,469.52             0.00       791,469.52
        Project Evaluations.........              0.00             0.00              0.00              0.00             0.00     1,809,073.17     1,809,073.17             0.00     1,809,073.17
                                     -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
        GRAND TOTAL.................   $114,800,000.00  ($9,800,000.00)   $105,000,004.00  ($12,285,000.00)   $92,715,000.00            $0.00   $92,715,000.00    $9,861,612.80   $82,853,387.20
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------


[[Page 17214]]

[FR Doc. 99-8569 Filed 4-7-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-22-P