1. Surface Transportation Reauthorization: Corridors and Borders
Jill Hochman, Director Office of Interstate and Border Planning, FHWA
June 10, 2003

2. Recap Existing Program SAFETEA
SAFETEA scheduled to be made public today
Secretary Mineta conducting information briefings
Talk today about border provisions, after a brief recap of the existing program

3. Recap of Corridors and Borders Program under TEA-21
Two sections (1118 & 1119); one funding authorization
Administered as one
Very broad eligibility

4. Corridors and Borders Program FY 1999 - FY 2003
Program totaled $1.1 billion for 423 awards
FY 2002 & 2003 Congress added $467 million funding to the program
Requests greatly exceed awards

5. Congressional Designations
Congressional direction increased over the years
FY % discretionary to 0% discretionary by FY 2002

6. Corridors vs. Borders
In first year of 100% discretion, corridor/border split nearly 50/50
As Congressional designations increased, awards tend towards corridor projects

7. Corridors vs. Borders Awards
Overall, 81% of awards went to corridors and 14% to borders.

8. Awards for Northern vs. Southern Border
Southern border received slightly more funding than the northern border

9. Proposed Corridor and Border Programs: Comparison with TEA-21
Projects
TEA-21
Draft Reauthorization Proposal
Corridor Program
Sec. 1118
Sec. 1806
Border Program
Sec. 1119
Sec. 1807
Funding level
$140 M combined (no split)
Split between two programs
GSA Transfer
$10 M
Allowed
Spending outside U.S.
Not allowed
Match
80/20
Corridors: 50/50
Borders: 80/20
Administrative Takedown
None
Under TEA-21 the two programs were administered as one.
In the draft reauthorization proposal, the two programs would be administered separately.
Each new program serves a different purpose.

10. Proposed Section 1806: Multi-state Corridor Planning Program
Reduces eligible uses
Encourages multi-state cooperation
Proposed funding of $496.5 M--
Separate from Border Program
Eligible Recipients: States & MPOs
Eligible modes: highway and multimodal
Eligible activities: planning where 2 or more States are involved
Not Eligible: environmental documentation, design, ROW, construction
Federal share 50% from Highway Trust Funds, and non HTF revenue from Federal sources can be up to an additional 30%
Funding subject to Federal-aid obligation limitation
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
$76.5 M
$84 M

11. Proposed Section 1806: Multi-state Corridor Planning Program
Program Eligibility
Recipients are to be states and MPOs
Only planning activities
Only to multi-state projects

12. Proposed Section 1806: Multi-state Corridor Planning Program
Program Funding
$496.5 M total
Highway Trust Fund share limited to 50% of project cost, other Federal sources can comprise an additional 30%
Other Federal sources could be GSA, Customs, etc.

13.   Proposed Section 1807: Border Planning, Operations and Technology Program
Increases focus to land borders
Clarifies cross border spending
Emphasizes safety in FY04
Proposed funding at $496.5 M --
Separate from Corridor Program
Eligible Recipients: States on US border with Canada and Mexico are eligible
Eligible modes: Highway and multimodal
Eligible activities: Planning, environmental studies, Ports of Entry and safety inspection improvements, operational enhancements, technology applications, ROW acquisition, design and construction
Federal share: up to 80%
Projects in Canada and Mexico eligible under specific conditions
$47 million set aside in FY04 for border truck safety inspection facilities in AZ, CA, NM, and TX, and is to be the last of a 3 year program to improve truck safety inspection at the US/Mexico border.
Funding subject to Federal-aid obligation limitation
Note – we recently learned about a $9M program in the FY 2004 Budget. It would be for grants to northern border states, FMCSA, to focus on improving truck hazmat enforcement.
FY 2004
FY 2005
FY 2006
FY 2007
FY 2008
FY 2009
$76.5 M
$84 M

14.   Proposed Section 1807: Border Planning, Operations and Technology Program
Selection Criteria
Selection criteria focused on
Safety
Freight
Security
Operations
Access to rail, marine or air services
Projects to be selected based on --
expected benefits, including air quality benefits, in relation to costs
prospects for early completion
endorsement by formally constituted bi-national organizations with both Federal and State or provincial representation
existence and significance of signed and binding multi-jurisdictional agreements
contributions of other funds above the minimum required
extent to which the project benefits are multi-modal

15.   Proposed Section 1807: Border Planning, Operations and Technology Program
Eligibility
Eligible Activities
Studies
Safety Inspection
Technology and information exchange
Some ROW, design, and construction
Funds may be used for activities at or near international land borders, including:
highway and multi-modal planning or environmental studies
cross-border Port of Entry and safety inspection improvements, including operational enhancements and technology applications
technology and information exchange activities
right-of-way acquisition, design, and construction, where needed to add the enhancements or applications described in subparagraphs (B) and (C), or to decrease air pollution emissions from vehicles or inspection facilities at border crossings.

16. Projects in Canada or Mexico
  Proposed Section 1807: Border Planning, Operations and Technology Program
Projects in Canada or Mexico
Allowed with restrictions
“To” the border state
One or more border States may request funds to construct projects in Canada or Mexico with following considerations:
projects limited to the improvement and efficiency of vehicle and cargo movements at international gateways and ports of entry at land border crossings
funds would be provided to border State(s)
requires cooperation of both the border State and Canada
Canada/Mexico must assure that the project will be constructed to standards equivalent to those in the US, and maintained and used over the useful life of the facility only for the purpose for which the funds were allocated

17.   Proposed Section 1807: Border Planning, Operations and Technology Program
Transfer to GSA
At State request
Directly or by DOT (FHWA)
Not an add-on to GSA appropriation
If done at state request, state match goes to GSA and funds available for obligation as if they were apportioned under Chapter 1, Title 23.
If done by DOT (FHWA), there is no match and funds are administered under GSA procedures and not FHWA’s.
Transfers not deemed an augmentation of GSA’s appropriation