United States Government Publishing Office publisher pbl distributor dst United States Government Accountability Office Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division author aut Government Organization text government publication eng GAOREPORTS Legislative Agency Publications gao legislative 2010-08-12 U.S. Government Printing Office 1996-07-26 monographic deposited born digital 60 p. GA 1.13:RCED-96-156 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156 P0b002ee180389a61 f:rc96156 DGPO 2010-08-12 2011-03-28 GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156 machine generated eng fdlp REPORT GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156 RCED-96-156 Federal aid for highways Ground transportation operations Construction grants Set-asides Historic preservation Data integrity Budget obligations Intergovernmental fiscal relations FHwA Transportation Enhancement Set-Aside Program FHwA Federal-Aid Highway Program Washington Iowa FHwA Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program FHwA Interstate Maintenance Program San Francisco (CA) Liberty County (GA) Minneapolis (MN) Griffin (GA) Maryland Georgia Delaware DOT Surface Transportation Program Letter Report RCED Pursuant to a congressional request, GAO reviewed the transportation enhancement set-aside program under the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA), focusing on: (1) how the obligation rates for fiscal year (FY) 1992 through FY 1995 compare with the obligation rates for other major highway programs; (2) what factors have affected the states' use of these funds; (3) the types of projects funded with enhancement funds; and (4) stakeholders' views on reauthorizing the program.<p/>GAO found that: (1) states obligated 22 percent of their enhancement funds in FY 1992 and 55 percent by FY 1995; (2) by FY 1995, other new ISTEA programs had obligation rates of about 70 percent and long-standing highway programs had obligation rates above 90 percent; (3) states' FY 1995 obligation rates ranged from 7 percent to 99 percent; (4) factors hindering states' obligation of enhancement funds include the resources needed to implement a new program, the nontraditional nature of such projects, sponsors' unfamiliarity with administrative requirements, and federal limits on total annual funding for all federal-aid highway programs; (5) the Federal Highway Administration (FHwA) has provided states and sponsors with additional guidance on regulatory requirements to promote such projects and alleviate confusion over project eligibility; (6) miscoded FHwA data show that over 50 percent of the projects received FY 1995 funding for ineligible enhancement activities; (7) FHwA did not start collecting specific financial data until FY 1995, but FY 1992 through February 1996 data show that bicycle and pedestrian projects, rail-to-trail conversions, restoration of historic transportation facilities, and landscaping projects received most of the obligated funding; and (8) most states favor modifying the set-aside program to reduce federal aid allocations for enhancement activities, which they consider less important than improving highway capacity or mobility. https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156/html/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156.htm https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156/pdf/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156.pdf GAO/RCED-96-156 https://www.govinfo.gov/app/details/GAOREPORTS-RCED-96-156 Letter Report GAO/RCED-96-156; Transportation Enhancements: Status of the $2.4 Billion Authorized for Nonmotorized Transportation; Federal aid for highways Ground transportation operations Construction grants Set-asides Historic preservation Data integrity Budget obligations Intergovernmental fiscal relations FHwA Transportation Enhancement Set-Aside Program FHwA Federal-Aid Highway Program Washington Iowa FHwA Highway Bridge Replacement and Rehabilitation Program FHwA Interstate Maintenance Program San Francisco (CA) Liberty County (GA) Minneapolis (MN) Griffin (GA) Maryland Georgia Delaware DOT Surface Transportation Program