[Senate Report 111-59]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
Calendar No. 126
111th Congress } { Report
1st Session } SENATE { 111-59
======================================================================
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION EXTENSION ACT OF 2009
_______
July 22, 2009.--Ordered to be printed
_______
Mrs. Boxer, from the Committee on Environment and Public Works,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
[To accompany S. 1498]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Environment and Public Works, which
considered an original bill (S. 1498) to provide an extension
of highway programs authorized under the Safe, Accountable,
Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for
Users, having considered the same, reports favorably thereon
and recommends that the bill do pass.
PURPOSES OF THE LEGISLATION
The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009 provides
an extension of highway programs authorized under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users through March of 2011.
GENERAL STATEMENT AND BACKGROUND
The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009 will
provide an extension of highway programs authorized under the
Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). This legislation will
extend, for an additional 18 months at 2009 funding levels,
those programs that fall under titles I, V, and VI of SAFETEA-
LU.
This bill is drafted in the form of a continuing
resolution, so that all programs, activities and eligibilities
are continued unless otherwise specified in the bill. The bill
does not make policy changes. Based on this extension, the
Federal Highway Administration will be able to release funding
for Federal fiscal year 2010 and half of fiscal year 2011.
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS
Section 1. Short title
Summary
Section 1 designates the short title as the ``Surface
Transportation Extension Act of 2009''.
Section 2. Federal-Aid highways
Section 2(a) In general
Summary
Section 2(a) extends until March 31, 2011 the requirements,
authorities, conditions, eligibilities, limitations, and other
provisions authorized under titles I, V, and VI of SAFETEA-LU,
the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act of 2008, and title 23
of U.S. Code, which would otherwise expire on or cease to apply
after September 30, 2009.
Discussion
This provision is intended to extend all the provisions of
SAFETEA-LU or any amendment made by that act, unless otherwise
provided for in this bill, through March 31, 2011. This
language is intended to make clear that the process that is
used to deliver programs, including all of the existing
requirements associated with them, will continue. For example,
all of the existing planning and contracting provisions, and
the requirements under 1101(b) of SAFETEA-LU would apply during
the extension period.
Section 2(b) Authorization of appropriations
Summary
Section 2(b)(1) and (b)(2) authorizes appropriations out of
the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account)
for fiscal year 2010 at a sum equal to the total amount
authorized for programs, projects, and activities for fiscal
year 2009 under titles I, V, and VI of SAFETEA-LU and title 23
of U.S. Code, and for the period beginning on October 1, 2010
and ending on March 31, 2011 a sum equal to \1/2\ of the total
amount authorized for programs, projects and activities for
fiscal year 2009 under titles I, V, and VI of SAFETEA-LU and
title 23 of U.S. Code.
Discussion
These subsections are intended to continue 2009 funding
levels, as authorized in SAFETEA-LU, for fiscal year 2010 and
the first six months of fiscal year 2011. This provision sets
the total funding levels for programs in these titles,
including administrative expenses in section 3.
Section 2(c)(1) and (c)(2) Use of funds
Summary
Section 2 subsections (c)(1) and (c)(2) clarify that funds
authorized in section 2(b) for fiscal year 2010 and the period
beginning on October 1, 2010 and ending on March 31, 2011 shall
be distributed, administered, limited and made available in the
same manner and at the same level as funds authorized to be
appropriated for fiscal year 2009 to carry out programs,
projects, activities, eligibilities, and requirements under
SAFETEA-LU, the SAFETEA-LU Technical Corrections Act of 2009,
and title 23 of U.S. Code.
Discussion
These subsections clarify the use of funds made available
under section 2(b) to ensure those funds are distributed,
administered, limited and made available for obligation in the
same manner and at the same levels as funds made available in
fiscal year 2009 to carry out SAFETEA-LU. For the period
beginning on October 1, 2010 and ending on March 31, 2011,
funds are to be distributed, administered, limited and made
available for obligation in the same manner and at the same
level as \1/2\ of the total amount authorized to be
appropriated in fiscal year 2009. These subsections
specifically address the flow of funding made available in
2(b), addressing the distribution across the States.
Unless noted elsewhere in this act, all programs, projects,
activities, eligibilities and requirements of SAFETEA-LU are to
be continued through March 31, 2011.
Section 2(c)(3) Calculation
Summary
Section 2 subsection (c)(3) clarifies that amounts
authorized to be appropriated under 2(b) shall be calculated
without regard to any rescission or cancellation of funds or
contract authority for fiscal year 2009.
Discussion
This provision clarifies that funding levels in this bill
are to be calculated using fiscal year 2009 funding levels
prior to any rescissions. In calculating the distribution of
funding by program, the agency should continue the
relationships among the core formula programs in calculating
and distributing funding into the individual program accounts
within each State's share of the total funds.
Section 2(c)(4) Contract authority
Summary
Section 2 subsection (c)(4) provides contract authority for
funds authorized to be appropriated under section 2.
Discussion
This subsection provides contract authority for the funds
authorized to be appropriated under section 2. This subsection
also exempts from any obligation limitations $639,000,000 in
annualized contract authority provided in section 105 of title
23, U.S. Code, and $100,000,000 in permanent and indefinite
contract authority for the Emergency Relief program under
section 125 of title 23, U.S. Code.
Section 2(c)(5) Limitation on obligations
Summary
Section 2 subsection (c)(5) clarifies that funds authorized
to be appropriated under subsection (b) and (c) are subject to
the limitation on obligations for fiscal year 2009 under
section 1102 of SAFETEA-LU. For fiscal year 2011, the
obligation limitation would be equal to half of the limitation
on obligations for fiscal year 2009 under section 1102 of
SAFETEA-LU.
Discussion
This subsection makes clear that the funds provided in this
act (except those otherwise exempted) are subject to the
obligation limitations set out in section 1102 of SAFETEA-LU.
Section 2(d) Extension and flexibility for certain allocated programs
Section 2(d)(1) Fiscal year 2010
Summary
Section 2 subsection (d)(1) ensures that for fiscal year
2010 a State receives the same portion of the share of funds
under section (b) as determined by the amount the State
received in fiscal year 2009 to carry out sections 1301, 1302,
1307, 1702, and 1934 of SAFETEA-LU and section 144(f) of title
23, U.S. Code. And that those funds are made available to the
State for programs apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of
title 23 of U.S. Code in the same proportion for each such
program that the amount apportioned to the state for that
program for fiscal year 2009 bears to the amount apportioned to
the state for fiscal year 2009 for all programs apportioned
under such sections of Code, and administered in the same
manner and with the same period of availability as such funding
is administered under such sections.
Discussion
This subsection ensures each state receives the same
portion of funds in fiscal year 2010 as they did in fiscal year
2009 to carry out sections 1301, 1302, 1307, 1702, and 1934 of
SAFETEA-LU and section 144(f) of title 23, U.S. Code. Further,
this subsection requires states to use those funds on and
administer them in the same manner as any program apportioned
under 104(b) and 144 of title 23, U.S. Code.
Section 2(d)(2) Fiscal year 2011
Summary
Section 2 subsection (d)(2) ensures that for the period
beginning on October 1, 2010 and ending on March 31, 2011, a
State shall receive the portion of the share of the funds under
section (b) as determined by \1/2\ of the amount the State
received in fiscal year 2009 to carry out sections 1301, 1302,
1307, 1702, and 1934 of SAFETEA-LU and 144(f) of title 23, U.S.
Code. And that those funds are made available to the State for
programs apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23
of U.S. Code, and in the same proportion for each such program
that the amount apportioned to the State for that program for
fiscal year 2009 bears to the amount apportioned to the State
for fiscal year 2009 for all programs apportioned under such
sections of Code, and administered in the same manner and with
the same period of availability as such funding is administered
under such sections.
Discussion
This subsection ensures that for the period between October
1, 2010 and March 31, 2011, each State receives \1/2\ of the
same portion of funds in fiscal year 2010 as they did in fiscal
year 2009 to carry out sections 1301, 1302, 1307, 1702, and
1934 of SAFETEA-LU and section 144(f) of title 23, U.S. Code.
Further, this subsection requires states to use those funds on
and administer them in the same manner as any program
apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23, U.S.
Code.
Section 2(d)(3) Additional funds
Summary
Section 2 subsection (d)(3) ensures that no additional
funds shall be provided for any project or activity under
subsection (c) that the Secretary of Transportation determines
was sufficiently funded before or during fiscal year 2009 to
achieve the authorized purpose. Subsection (d) further
clarifies that any funds made available as a result of the
Secretary of Transportation's determination shall be reserved
by the Secretary and redistributed to each State in accordance
with paragraph (1) or (2) of subsection (c), or paragraph (1)
or (2) of subsection (d) as appropriate to carry out other
highway projects and activities extended by subsection (c).
Those funds will be redistributed in the portion that the total
amount of funds made available in 2009 for projects and
activities described in subparagraph (A) in the State bears to
the total amount of funds made available for fiscal year 2009
for those projects and activities in all States.
Discussion
This section makes clear that projects or activities that
are completed or have achieved their authorized purposes do not
need to be continued under this section. Additional funding
provided in this bill for projects or activities that are
determined by the Secretary to have already been sufficiently
funded would then be made available to the State for programs
apportioned under sections 104(b) and 144 of title 23, U.S.
Code. The Secretary should distinguish between those projects
and activities that were in place prior to SAFETEA-LU and thus
are of a continuing nature as opposed to those that were
authorized for the SAFETEA-LU period alone.
Section 2(e) Extension of authorizations under Title V of SAFETEA-LU
Summary
Comparable to the treatment of grant programs in Section
2(c) above, Section 2(e) extends the SAFETEA-LU research
programs in paragraphs (1) through (5) at the fiscal year 2009
levels for fiscal year 2010 and half of fiscal year 2011 in the
style of a continuing resolution. The Title V programs include
Surface Transportation Research, Development and Deployment
Program (STRDD), Training and Education, Bureau of
Transportation Statistics, University Transportation Research,
and Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) Research.
Treatment of SAFETEA-LU designations. A number of the
designated projects, particularly under STRDD, were established
only as one-time activities; the bill clarifies that such
activities should not be duplicated during the extension. The
Secretary is charged with identifying those projects or
activities that have satisfied the SAFETEA-LU authorized
purpose and assuring that an amount equal to that funding is
allocated during the extension period to STRDD. Further, it is
the intention of this legislation that the full funding
available to STRDD be devoted to the major program areas in the
same relative amounts as were actually used during the SAFETEA-
LU period.
Discussion
Extension Research Priorities. The FHWA Administrator is
encouraged, as part of the agency's overall program delivery
functions, to elevate the importance placed on data collection,
data analysis, and tool development as they are critical to
informing the actions taken by grantees under FHWA core
programs. Each of the major research program areas continued
under this bill can have an important part to play in
supporting these efforts, including monitoring system condition
and performance, analysis of such system performance data,
modeling of the relevant relationships with outcomes of
transportation investments including operations, and other
tools that are necessary to adopt a performance-based asset
management approach. These should be emphasized during the 18-
month extension period as a means to prepare for the next
generation of investment and operations. Implementation of
research studies, conducted in-house and supplemented with
these resources, should reflect the following priorities within
each of the major program areas:
(1) Safety: conduct studies that will improve safety
through better information on crash locations and causes in
support of Strategic Highway Safety Plans
(2) Infrastructure: conduct studies that expedite the
improvement, development, and deployment of asset management
tools that will help identify and evaluate investment and
operational options that in turn improve system preservation
and new capacity decisions
(3) Operations: conduct studies that will develop and
improve analytic tools to advance the deployment of investment
and operational strategies for more efficient freight networks
and reduced congestion
(4) Planning: conduct studies and analyses to support
regional, metropolitan and freight planning; identify links
between data requirements necessary to establish performance
baselines in (1), (2) and (3) above and planning requirements
as appropriate; incorporate modeling of mode choice and non-
motorized travel into existing tools; develop outcome-based
analytic tools to monitor impacts of investments and
operational decisions on system performance to provide feedback
into the planning process
(5) Policy: building upon prior studies and tests including
by the Transportation Research Board, Section 1909 and Section
11142 Commissions, NCHRP 20-24 (69) Implementable Strategies
for Shifting to Direct Usage-Based Charges for Transportation
Funding, and field tests conducted in Oregon, Puget Sound, and
by the University of Iowa, conduct studies that evaluate the
feasibility, approaches and methods of assessing fees on
highway users that result in sustainable funding mechanisms;
design the initial phase of pilot studies for subsequent
consideration
(6) Corporate: conduct the overall research program such
that the above program areas are effective and mutually
supportive including consideration of integrating the various
data systems for efficiency of data collection, reporting, and
analysis
FHWA is encouraged to work closely with data providers
across the agency, elsewhere in the Department, with State
DOTs, and with MPOs. The Secretary is encouraged to continue to
communicate routinely with the appropriate Congressional
committees as to its findings and provide a report to Congress
12 months after enactment of the Act.
Section 3. Administrative expenses
Summary
Section 3 authorizes funds to be appropriated from the
Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for
the administrative expenses of the Federal-aid highway program.
For fiscal year 2010 a total of $422,425,000 is authorized, and
for the period beginning on October 1, 2010 and ending on March
31, 2011 a total of $217,023,500 is authorized. This section
also provides contract authority for the funds authorized under
this section.
Discussion
The funds authorized in Section 3 are not in addition to
the total amounts authorized but are to be provided out of the
funds made available in Section 2 of the legislation.
LEGISLATIVE HISTORY
On July 15, 2009 the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works considered an original bill to provide an
extension of highway programs authorized under the Safe,
Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users. Senators Boxer and Inhofe offered a technical
amendment to ensure that the research program under SAFETEA-LU
would be continued and that the projects and activities that
were completed under SAFETEA-LU were not replicated in the
extension but funding for those projects would be redirected to
the Title V research program. This amendment was adopted by
voice vote. Senators Boxer and Inhofe offered a second
technical amendment that corrected the funding levels for
Department of Transportation administrative expenses, which was
adopted by voice vote.
Senator Voinovich offered an amendment to reduce the period
of the extension of the Federal-aid highway programs to one
year, ending on September 20, 2010. He offered a second degree
amendment to his amendment which corrected the date by changing
it from September 20, 2010 to September 30, 2010. The second
degree amendment was adopted by voice vote. The Voinovich
amendment as amended failed by roll call vote with 11 nays and
8 yeas.
Senator Bond offered an amendment to repeal Section 10212
of SAFETEA-LU therefore canceling the rescission of unobligated
funds scheduled to occur on September 30, 2009, which failed by
roll call vote with 14 nays and 5 yeas. The Surface
Transportation Extension Act of 2009 as amended was reported
favorably to the Senate with 18 yeas and 1 nay.
HEARINGS
On June 25, 2009 the Senate Committee on Environment and
Public Works held a hearing entitled the ``Impacts of Expected
Highway Trust Fund Insolvency'' at which members discussed the
need for an infusion of revenue into the highway trust fund and
an 18 month extension of SAFETEA-LU.
ROLL CALL VOTES
The Committee on Environment and Public Works met to
consider the Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009 on
July 15, 2009. Senator Voinovich offered an amendment to reduce
the period of the extension of the Federal-aid highway programs
to one year, ending on September 20, 2010. The Voinovich
amendment as amended failed by roll call vote with 11 nays and
8 yeas.
Senator Bond offered an amendment to repeal Section 10212
of SAFETEA-LU therefore canceling the rescission of unobligated
funds scheduled to occur on September 30, 2009, which failed by
roll call vote with 14 nays and 5 yeas. Following amendments, a
quorum of the Committee being present, the Surface
Transportation Extension Act of 2009 as amended was reported
favorably to the Senate with 18 yeas and 1 nay.
REGULATORY IMPACT STATEMENT
In compliance with section 11(b)(2) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate, the Committee estimates that no
regulatory impact is expected by the passage of the bill. The
bill will not affect the personal privacy of individuals. As
noted below, the Congressional Budget Office has concluded that
the bill will not establish any private-sector mandates.
MANDATES ASSESSMENT
In compliance with the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995
(Public Law 104-4), the Committee finds, consistent with the
determination of the Congressional Budget Office, that the
Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009 would impose no
Federal intergovernmental unfunded mandates on State, local or
tribal governments. The Committee further agrees with the
Congressional Budget Office that the bill does not impose
private sector mandates.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE COST ESTIMATE
In compliance with paragraph 11(a) of rule XXVI of the
Standing Rules of the Senate and section 403 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee provides the
following cost estimate, prepared by the Congressional Budget
Office.
CONGRESSIONAL BUDGET OFFICE
S. 1498--The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009
Summary: The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009
would extend through March 30, 2011, Federal-Aid Highway
programs authorized by the Safe, Accountable, Flexible,
Efficient Transportation Equity Act (SAFETEA-LU; Public Law
109-59). The bill would set the amount of contract authority
(the authority to incur obligations in advance of
appropriations and a mandatory form of budget authority) at
$43.2 billion for 2010 and at $21.6 billion for the period from
October 1, 2010, to March 30, 2011.
Consistent with the rules in the Balanced Budget and
Emergency Deficit Control Act for constructing the baseline,
CBO assumes that funding provided by the bill for the first six
months of fiscal year 2011 would continue at the same rate
through the rest of that year and in each of the following
years. Hence, CBO estimates that enacting the bill would result
in baseline contract authority totaling $432 billion over the
2010-2019 period. That funding level represents an increase of
$119 billion ($11.9 billion per year) above the amounts of
contract authority for highway programs currently projected in
CBO's baseline for the 2010-2019 period.
CBO expects that most spending from the highway program
will continue to be controlled by limits on annual obligations
set in appropriations acts. Consequently, the changes in
contract authority would not increase mandatory outlays. CBO
estimates that, subject to the enactment of annual obligation
limitations for the 18-month period of program extension,
implementing the bill would increase discretionary spending by
$60.6 billion over the 2010-2019 period. CBO estimates that
enacting the bill would not affect revenues.
This bill contains no intergovernmental or private-sector
mandates as defined in the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act (UMRA)
and would impose no costs on state, local, or tribal
governments.
Estimated cost to the Federal Government: The estimated
budgetary impact of the legislation is summarized in the
following table. The costs of this legislation fall within
budget function 400 (transportation).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
By fiscal year, in billions of dollars--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2010-2014 2010-2019
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHANGES IN DIRECT SPENDINGEstimated Budget Authority........................ 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 11.9 59.5 119.0
Estimated Outlays................................. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 CHANGES IN SPENDING SUBJECT TO APPROPRIATIONObligation Limitation............................. 41.2 20.6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Estimated Outlays\1\.............................. 11.0 22.3 15.0 5.5 2.8 1.7 1.2 0.8 0.2 0 56.6 60.61
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Estimated discretionary outlays reflect use of funds under the 2010 and part-year 2011 obligation limitations that the bill specifies. (Outlays
stemming from additional contract authority shown in the table would be authorized in future legislation that covers the period after the 18-month
program extension.)
Basis of estimate:
Changes in direct spending
The Surface Transportation Extension Act of 2009 would
extend through March 30, 2011, Federal-Aid Highway programs
authorized by SAFETEA-LU, the current authorization for
transportation programs. For highway programs, the bill would
set the amount of contract authority (the authority to incur
obligation in advance of appropriations and a mandatory form of
budget authority) at $43.2 billion for 2010 and at $21.6
billion for the period from October 1, 2010, to March 30, 2011.
The bill would provide contract authority for highway
programs at the same level authorized in SAFETEA-LU for 2009,
notwithstanding any rescissions or cancellations of contract
authority in either SAFETEA-LU or any other act. SAFETEA-LU
provided $43.0 billion in contract authority for 2009. However,
SAFETEA-LU and the 2009 Omnibus Appropriations Act (Public Law
111-8) contained rescissions of the 2009 program's contract
authority that totaled $11.9 billion. The Omnibus
Appropriations Act also provided $143 million in additional
contract authority for highway programs. The Balanced Budget
and Emergency Deficit Control Act specifies that the baseline
projection for the cost of an expiring mandatory program with
current-year outlays in excess of $50 million be assumed to
continue at the program level in place when it is scheduled to
expire. As a result, CBO incorporated those rescissions and
additions to contract authority in its baseline for highway
programs over the 2010-2019 period.
Further, each year, SAFETEA-LU allows states to elect to
have the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) administer up to
$1 billion of highway contract authority that is available to
be spent on transit projects. Because the amounts transferred
to FTA would be available for transit programs with or without
the formal transfer of funds between the highway and transit
programs, CBO did not consider those transfers for the purposes
of calculating the increase in contract authority for the
highway program resulting from this legislation. Combined with
the rescissions and additions contained in SAFETEA-LU and the
Omnibus Appropriations Act (Public Law 111-8), the contract
authority available for highway programs is $31.3 billion in
2009, and CBO projects that same amount in subsequent years. As
a result, CBO estimates that the bill would add $11.9 billion
(the difference between $43.2 billion and $31.3 billion) of
contract authority annually to the baseline over the 2010-2019
period.
CBO expects that most spending from the highway program
will be controlled by limits on annual obligations set in
appropriations acts. Consequently, the changes in contract
authority would not increase mandatory outlays. SAFETEA-LU
exempts certain portions of the Federal-Aid Highway program
from the obligation limitations set in appropriations acts,
resulting in mandatory outlays. Under the bill and under
current law, a total of $739 million each year from the Equity
Bonus and the Emergency Relief programs is exempt from any
limitation on obligations in 2010 and in each of the following
years. That sum is equal to the baseline level of exempt
contract authority for those programs. As a result, the bill
would not increase outlays from direct spending relative to the
baseline.
Changes in spending subject to appropriation
CBO expects that the contract authority provided in the
bill would be controlled by limitations on obligations
contained in annual appropriation acts. CBO's estimate of
discretionary spending under this legislation reflects the
proposed obligation limitation that would be provided under the
bill and does not include projections of that authority. The
bill would extend the obligation limitations contained in
SAFETEA-LU--$41.2 billion for 2010 and $20.6 billion for the
first six months of 2011. Traditionally, along with the
contract authority discussed above, states have elected to use
$1 billion of those amounts annually for transit programs
administered by FTA. This transfer of authority to enter into
contracts and to obligate funds affects how quickly spending
occurs because spending for transit programs traditionally
occurs more slowly than spending for highway programs.
Consistent with historical spending patterns of highway and
transit programs and subject to the enactment of the 2010 and
part-year 2011 obligation limitations, CBO estimates that
implementing the bill would cost $11.0 billion in 2010 and
$60.6 billion over the 2010-2019 period.
Intergovernmental and private-sector mandates: This bill
contains no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates as
defined in UMRA and would impose no costs on state, local, or
tribal governments.
Estimate prepared by: Federal costs: Sarah Puro; Impact on
state, local, and tribal governments: Ryan Miller; Impact on
the private sector: Jacob Kuipers.
Estimate approved by: Theresa Gullo, Deputy Assistant
Director for Budget Analysis.
CHANGES IN EXISTING LAW
Section 12 of rule XXVI of the Standing Rules of the Senate
requires the committee to publish changes in existing law made
by the bill as reported. Passage of this bill will make no
changes to existing law.