§ 101. Definitions and declaration of policy

Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1301(a), (b), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 527, provided that: “(a) In General.—It is the policy of the United States that—“(1) it is in the national interest for the Department [of Transportation], State departments of transportation, transit agencies, and all other recipients of Federal transportation funds—“(A) to accelerate project delivery and reduce costs; and “(B) to ensure that the planning, design, engineering, construction, and financing of transportation projects is done in an efficient and effective manner, promoting accountability for public investments and encouraging greater private sector involvement in project financing and delivery while enhancing safety and protecting the environment; “(2) delay in the delivery of transportation projects increases project costs, harms the economy of the United States, and impedes the travel of the people of the United States and the shipment of goods for the conduct of commerce; and “(3) the Secretary [of Transportation] shall identify and promote the deployment of innovation aimed at reducing the time and money required to deliver transportation projects while enhancing safety and protecting the environment. “(b) Project Delivery Initiative.—“(1) In general.—To advance the policy described in subsection (a), the Secretary [of Transportation] shall carry out a project delivery initiative under this section [amending this section and enacting this note]. “(2) Purposes.—The purposes of the project delivery initiative shall be—“(A) to develop and advance the use of best practices to accelerate project delivery and reduce costs across all modes of transportation and expedite the deployment of technology and innovation; “(B) to implement provisions of law designed to accelerate project delivery; and “(C) to select eligible projects for applying experimental features to test innovative project delivery techniques. “(3) Advancing the use of best practices.—“(A) In general.—In carrying out the initiative under this section, the Secretary shall identify and advance best practices to reduce delivery time and project costs, from planning through construction, for transportation projects and programs of projects regardless of mode and project size. “(B) Administration.—To advance the use of best practices, the Secretary shall—“(i) engage interested parties, affected communities, resource agencies, and other stakeholders to gather information regarding opportunities for accelerating project delivery and reducing costs; “(ii) establish a clearinghouse for the collection, documentation, and advancement of existing and new innovative approaches and best practices; “(iii) disseminate information through a variety of means to transportation stakeholders on new innovative approaches and best practices; and “(iv) provide technical assistance to assist transportation stakeholders in the use of flexibility authority to resolve project delays and accelerate project delivery if feasible. “(4) Implementation of accelerated project delivery.—The Secretary shall ensure that the provisions of this subtitle [subtitle C (§§ 1301–1323) of title I of div. A of Pub. L. 112–141, see Tables for classification] designed to accelerate project delivery are fully implemented, including—“(A) expanding eligibility of early acquisition of property prior to completion of environmental review under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.); “(B) allowing the use of the construction manager or general contractor method of contracting in the Federal-aid highway system; and “(C) establishing a demonstration program to streamline the relocation process by permitting a lump-sum payment for acquisition and relocation if elected by the displaced occupant.”

Innovative Project Delivery Methods Policy

Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1304(a), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 532, provided that: “(1) In general.—Congress declares that it is in the national interest to promote the use of innovative technologies and practices that increase the efficiency of construction of, improve the safety of, and extend the service life of highways and bridges. “(2) Inclusions.—The innovative technologies and practices described in paragraph (1) include state-of-the-art intelligent transportation system technologies, elevated performance standards, and new highway construction business practices that improve highway safety and quality, accelerate project delivery, and reduce congestion related to highway construction.”

Report on Highway Trust Fund Expenditures

Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1433, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1430, which required periodic reports describing the administrative expenses of the Federal Highway Administration funded from the Highway Trust Fund, was repealed by Pub. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11125(a), Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 506.

Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1535, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 584, provided that: “(a) Initial Report.—Not later than 150 days after the date of enactment of this Act [see section 3(a), (b) of Pub. L. 112–141, set out as Effective and Termination Dates of 2012 Amendment notes above], the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report describing the activities funded from the Highway Trust Fund during each of fiscal years 2009 through 2011, including for purposes other than construction and maintenance of highways and bridges. “(b) Updates.—Not later than 5 years after the date on which the report is submitted under subsection (a) and every 5 years thereafter, the Comptroller General of the United States shall submit to Congress a report that updates the information provided in the report under that subsection for the applicable 5-year period. “(c) Inclusions.—A report submitted under subsection (a) or (b) shall include information similar to the information included in the report of the Government Accountability Office numbered ‘GAO–09–729R’ and entitled ‘Highway Trust Fund Expenditures on Purposes Other Than Construction and Maintenance of Highways and Bridges During Fiscal Years 2004–2008’.”

Projects of National and Regional Significance

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1301, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1198, as amended by Pub. L. 110–244, title I, § 103(a), June 6, 2008, 122 Stat. 1578; Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1120, July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 492, which provided for the establishment of a program to provide grants to eligible applicants for surface transportation programs of national and regional significance, set out criteria for selection for such grants and grant requirements, and authorized appropriations for the implementation of the program, was repealed by Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1105(c), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1337.

National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1302, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1204, as amended by Pub. L. 110–244, title I, §§ 101(d), 103(b), June 6, 2008, 122 Stat. 1573, 1578, which related to the National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program, was repealed by Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1519(b)(2), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 575.

Delta Region Transportation Development Program

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1308, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1218, provided that: “(a) In General.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall carry out a program in the 8 States comprising the Delta Region (Alabama, Arkansas, Illinois, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, and Tennessee) to—“(1) support and encourage multistate transportation planning and corridor development; “(2) provide for transportation project development; “(3) facilitate transportation decisionmaking; and “(4) support transportation construction. “(b) Eligible Recipients.—A State transportation department or metropolitan planning organization in a Delta Region State may receive and administer funds provided under the program. “(c) Eligible Activities.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall make allocations under the program for multistate highway planning, development, and construction projects. “(d) Other Provisions Regarding Eligibility.—All activities funded under this program shall be consistent with the continuing, cooperative, and comprehensive planning processes required by sections 134 and 135 of title 23, United States Code. “(e) Selection Criteria.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall select projects to be carried out under the program based on—“(1) whether the project is located—“(A) in an area under the authority of the Delta Regional Authority; and “(B) on a Federal-aid highway; “(2) endorsement of the project by the State department of transportation; and “(3) evidence of the ability of the recipient of funds provided under the program to complete the project. “(f) Program Priorities.—In administering the program, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall—“(1) encourage State and local officials to work together to develop plans for multimodal and multijurisdictional transportation decisionmaking; and “(2) give priority to projects that emphasize multimodal planning, including planning for operational improvements that—“(A) increase the mobility of people and goods; “(B) improve the safety of the transportation system with respect to catastrophic natural disasters or disasters caused by human activity; and “(C) contribute to the economic vitality of the area in which the project is being carried out. “(g) Federal Share.—Amounts provided by the Delta Regional Authority to carry out a project under this subsection [probably means this section] may be applied to the non-Federal share of the project required by section 120 of title 23, United States Code. “(h) Funding.—“(1) In general.—There is authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this section $10,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009. “(2) Contract authority.—Funds made available to carry out this section shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code; except that such funds shall not be transferable and shall remain available until expended.”

Motorcyclist Advisory Council

Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1426, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1426, which related to the establishment of a Motorcyclist Advisory Council, was repealed by Pub. L. 117–58, div. B, title IV, § 24111(c)(1), Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 815. See section 355 of Title 49, Transportation.

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1914, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1478, provided that: “(a) In General.—The Secretary [of Transportation], acting through the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, in consultation with the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate, shall appoint a Motorcyclist Advisory Council to coordinate with and advise the Administrator on infrastructure issues of concern to motorcyclists, including—“(1) barrier design; “(2) road design, construction, and maintenance practices; and “(3) the architecture and implementation of intelligent transportation system technologies. “(b) Composition.—The Council shall consist of not more than 10 members of the motorcycling community with professional expertise in national motorcyclist safety advocacy, including—“(1) at least—“(A) one member recommended by a national motorcyclist association; “(B) one member recommended by a national motorcycle riders foundation; “(C) one representative of the National Association of State Motorcycle Safety Administrators; “(D) two members of State motorcyclists’ organizations; “(E) one member recommended by a national organization that represents the builders of highway infrastructure; “(F) one member recommended by a national association that represents the traffic safety systems industry; and “(G) one member of a national safety organization; and “(2) at least one, and not more than two, motorcyclists who are traffic system design engineers or State transportation department officials.”

National Corridor Planning and Development Program

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1118, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 161, provided that: “(a) In General.—The Secretary shall establish and implement a program to make allocations to States and metropolitan planning organizations for coordinated planning, design, and construction of corridors of national significance, economic growth, and international or interregional trade. A State or metropolitan planning organization may apply to the Secretary for allocations under this section. “(b) Eligibility of Corridors.—The Secretary may make allocations under this section with respect to—“(1) high priority corridors identified in section 1105(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 [Pub. L. 102–240, 105 Stat. 2032]; and “(2) any other significant regional or multistate highway corridor not described in whole or in part in paragraph (1) selected by the Secretary after consideration of—“(A) the extent to which the annual volume of commercial vehicle traffic at the border stations or ports of entry of each State—“(i) has increased since the date of enactment of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (Public Law 103–182 [Dec. 8, 1993]); and “(ii) is projected to increase in the future; “(B) the extent to which commercial vehicle traffic in each State—“(i) has increased since the date of enactment of the North American Free Trade Agreement Implementation Act (Public Law 103–182); and “(ii) is projected to increase in the future; “(C) the extent to which international truck-borne commodities move through each State; “(D) the reduction in commercial and other travel time through a major international gateway or affected port of entry expected as a result of the proposed project including the level of traffic delays at at-grade highway crossings of major rail lines in trade corridors; “(E) the extent of leveraging of Federal funds provided under this subsection, including—“(i) use of innovative financing; “(ii) combination with funding provided under other sections of this Act [see Tables for classification] and title 23, United States Code; and “(iii) combination with other sources of Federal, State, local, or private funding including State, local, and private matching funds; “(F) the value of the cargo carried by commercial vehicle traffic, to the extent that the value of the cargo and congestion impose economic costs on the Nation’s economy; and “(G) encourage or facilitate major multistate or regional mobility and economic growth and development in areas underserved by existing highway infrastructure. “(c) Purposes.—Allocations may be made under this section for 1 or more of the following purposes:“(1) Feasibility studies. “(2) Comprehensive corridor planning and design activities. “(3) Location and routing studies. “(4) Multistate and intrastate coordination for corridors described in subsection (b). “(5) After review by the Secretary of a development and management plan for the corridor or a usable component thereof under subsection (b)—“(A) environmental review; and “(B) construction. “(d) Corridor Development and Management Plan.—A State or metropolitan planning organization receiving an allocation under this section shall develop, and submit to the Secretary for review, a development and management plan for the corridor or a usable component thereof with respect to which the allocation is being made. Such plan shall include, at a minimum, the following elements:“(1) A complete and comprehensive analysis of corridor costs and benefits. “(2) A coordinated corridor development plan and schedule, including a timetable for completion of all planning and development activities, environmental reviews and permits, and construction of all segments. “(3) A finance plan, including any innovative financing methods and, if the corridor is a multistate corridor, a State-by-State breakdown of corridor finances. “(4) The results of any environmental reviews and mitigation plans. “(5) The identification of any impediments to the development and construction of the corridor, including any environmental, social, political and economic objections. In the case of a multistate corridor, the Secretary shall encourage all States having jurisdiction over any portion of such corridor to participate in the development of such plan. “(e) Applicability of Title 23.—Funds made available by section 1101 of this Act [set out in part as a note below] to carry out this section and section 1119 [set out below] shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code. “(f) Coordination of Planning.—Planning with respect to a corridor under this section shall be coordinated with transportation planning being carried out by the States and metropolitan planning organizations along the corridor and, to the extent appropriate, with transportation planning being carried out by Federal land management agencies, by tribal governments, or by government agencies in Mexico or Canada. “(g) State Defined.—In this section, the term ‘State’ has the meaning such term has under section 101 of title 23, United States Code.”

Border Infrastructure

Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1437, Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1432, provided that: “(a) In General.—After consultation with relevant transportation planning organizations, the Governor of a State that shares a land border with Canada or Mexico may designate for each fiscal year not more than 5 percent of the funds made available to the State under section 133(d)(1)(B) of title 23, United States Code, for border infrastructure projects eligible under section 1303 of SAFETEA–LU (23 U.S.C. 101 note; 119 Stat. 1207). “(b) Use of Funds.—Funds designated under this section shall be available under the requirements of section 1303 of SAFETEA–LU (23 U.S.C. 101 note; 119 Stat. 1207). “(c) Certification.—Before making a designation under subsection (a), the Governor shall certify that the designation is consistent with transportation planning requirements under title 23, United States Code. “(d) Notification.—Not later than 30 days after making a designation under subsection (a), the Governor shall submit to the relevant transportation planning organizations within the border region a written notification of any suballocated or distributed amount of funds available for obligation by jurisdiction. “(e) Limitation.—This section applies only to funds apportioned to a State after the date of enactment of this Act [Dec. 4, 2015]. “(f) Deadline for Designation.—A designation under subsection (a) shall—“(1) be submitted to the Secretary [of Transportation] not later than 30 days before the first day of the fiscal year for which the designation is being made; and “(2) remain in effect for the funds designated under subsection (a) for a fiscal year until the Governor of the State notifies the Secretary of the termination of the designation. “(g) Unobligated Funds After Termination.—Effective beginning on the date of a termination under subsection (f)(2), all remaining unobligated funds that were designated under subsection (a) for the fiscal year for which the designation is being terminated shall be made available to the State for the purposes described in section 133(d)(1)(B) of title 23, United States Code.”

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1303, Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1207, provided that: “(a) General Authority.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall implement a coordinated border infrastructure program under which the Secretary shall distribute funds to border States to improve the safe movement of motor vehicles at or across the border between the United States and Canada and the border between the United States and Mexico. “(b) Eligible Uses.—Subject to subsection (d), a State may use funds apportioned under this section only for—“(1) improvements in a border region to existing transportation and supporting infrastructure that facilitate cross-border motor vehicle and cargo movements; “(2) construction of highways and related safety and safety enforcement facilities in a border region that facilitate motor vehicle and cargo movements related to international trade; “(3) operational improvements in a border region, including improvements relating to electronic data interchange and use of telecommunications, to expedite cross border motor vehicle and cargo movement; “(4) modifications to regulatory procedures to expedite safe and efficient cross border motor vehicle and cargo movements; and “(5) international coordination of transportation planning, programming, and border operation with Canada and Mexico relating to expediting cross border motor vehicle and cargo movements. “(c) Apportionment of Funds.—On October 1 of each fiscal year, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall apportion among border States sums authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section for such fiscal year as follows:“(1) 20 percent in the ratio that—“(A) the total number of incoming commercial trucks that pass through the land border ports of entry within the boundaries of a border State, as determined by the Secretary; bears to “(B) the total number of incoming commercial trucks that pass through such ports of entry within the boundaries of all the border States, as determined by the Secretary. “(2) 30 percent in the ratio that—“(A) the total number of incoming personal motor vehicles and incoming buses that pass through land border ports of entry within the boundaries of a border State, as determined by the Secretary; bears to “(B) the total number of incoming personal motor vehicles and incoming buses that pass through such ports of entry within the boundaries of all the border States, as determined by the Secretary. “(3) 25 percent in the ratio that—“(A) the total weight of incoming cargo by commercial trucks that pass through land border ports of entry within the boundaries of a border State, as determined by the Secretary; bears to “(B) the total weight of incoming cargo by commercial trucks that pass through such ports of entry within the boundaries of all the border States, as determined by the Secretary. “(4) 25 percent of the ratio that—“(A) the total number of land border ports of entry within the boundaries of a border State, as determined by the Secretary; bears to “(B) the total number of land border ports of entry within the boundaries of all the border States, as determined by the Secretary. “(d) Projects in Canada or Mexico.—A project in Canada or Mexico, proposed by a border State to directly and predominantly facilitate cross-border motor vehicle and cargo movements at an international port of entry into the border region of the State, may be constructed using funds apportioned to the State under this section if, before obligation of those funds, Canada or Mexico, or the political subdivision of Canada or Mexico that is responsible for the operation of the facility to be constructed, provides assurances satisfactory to the Secretary [of Transportation] that any facility constructed under this subsection will be—“(1) constructed in accordance with standards equivalent to applicable standards in the United States; and “(2) properly maintained and used over the useful life of the facility for the purpose for which the Secretary is allocating such funds to the project. “(e) Transfer of Funds to the General Services Administration.—“(1) State funds.—At the request of a border State, funds apportioned to the State under this section may be transferred to the General Services Administration for the purpose of funding one or more projects described in subsection (b) if—“(A) the Secretary [of Transportation] determines, after consultation with the transportation department of the border State, that the General Services Administration should carry out the project; and “(B) the General Services Administration agrees to accept the transfer of, and to administer, those funds in accordance with this section. “(2) Non-federal share.—“(A) In general.—A border State that makes a request under paragraph (1) shall provide directly to the General Services Administration, for each project covered by the request, the non-Federal share of the cost of the project. “(B) No augmentation of appropriations.—Funds provided by a border State under subparagraph (A)—“(i) shall not be considered to be an augmentation of the appropriations made available to the General Services Administration; and “(ii) shall be— “(I) administered, subject to paragraph (1)(B), in accordance with the procedures of the General Services Administration; but “(II) available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code. “(3) Obligation authority.—Obligation authority shall be transferred to the General Services Administration for a project in the same manner and amount as the funds provided for the project under paragraph (1). “(4) Limitation on transfer of funds.—No State may transfer to the General Services Administration under this subsection an amount that is more than the lesser of—“(A) 15 percent of the aggregate amount of funds apportioned to the State under this section for such fiscal year; or “(B) $5,000,000. “(f) Applicability of Title 23.—Funds made available to carry out this section shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code; except that, subject to subsection (e), such funds shall not be transferable and shall remain available until expended, and the Federal share of the cost of a project under this section shall be determined in accordance with section 120 of such title. “(g) Definitions.—In this section, the following definitions apply:“(1) Border region.—The term ‘border region’ means any portion of a border State within 100 miles of an international land border with Canada or Mexico. “(2) Border state.—The term ‘border State’ means any State that has an international land border with Canada or Mexico. “(3) Commercial truck.—The term ‘commercial truck’ means a commercial motor vehicle as defined in section 31301(4) (other than subparagraph (B)) of title 49, United States Code. “(4) Motor vehicle.—The term ‘motor vehicle’ has the meaning such term has under section 101(a) of title 23, United States Code. “(5) State.—The term ‘State’ has the meaning such term has in section 101(a) of such title 23.”

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1119, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 163, provided that: “(a) General Authority.—The Secretary shall establish and implement a coordinated border infrastructure program under which the Secretary may make allocations to border States and metropolitan planning organizations for areas within the boundaries of 1 or more border States for projects to improve the safe movement of people and goods at or across the border between the United States and Canada and the border between the United States and Mexico. “(b) Eligible Uses.—Allocations to States and metropolitan planning organizations under this section may only be used in a border region for—“(1) improvements to existing transportation and supporting infrastructure that facilitate cross-border vehicle and cargo movements; “(2) construction of highways and related safety and safety enforcement facilities that will facilitate vehicle and cargo movements related to international trade; “(3) operational improvements, including improvements relating to electronic data interchange and use of telecommunications, to expedite cross border vehicle and cargo movement; “(4) modifications to regulatory procedures to expedite cross border vehicle and cargo movements; “(5) international coordination of planning, programming, and border operation with Canada and Mexico relating to expediting cross border vehicle and cargo movements; and “(6) activities of Federal inspection agencies. “(c) Selection Criteria.—The Secretary shall make allocations under this section on the basis of—“(1) expected reduction in commercial and other motor vehicle travel time through an international border crossing as a result of the project; “(2) improvements in vehicle and highway safety and cargo security related to motor vehicles crossing a border with Canada or Mexico; “(3) strategies to increase the use of existing, underutilized border crossing facilities and approaches; “(4) leveraging of Federal funds provided under this section, including use of innovative financing, combination of such funds with funding provided under other sections of this Act [see Tables for classification], and combination with other sources of Federal, State, local, or private funding; “(5) degree of multinational involvement in the project and demonstrated coordination with other Federal agencies responsible for the inspection of vehicles, cargo, and persons crossing international borders and their counterpart agencies in Canada and Mexico; “(6) improvements in vehicle and highway safety and cargo security in and through the gateway or affected port of entry concerned; “(7) the degree of demonstrated coordination with Federal inspection agencies; “(8) the extent to which the innovative and problem solving techniques of the proposed project would be applicable to other border stations or ports of entry; “(9) demonstrated local commitment to implement and sustain continuing comprehensive border or affected port of entry planning processes and improvement programs; and “(10) such other factors as the Secretary determines are appropriate to promote border transportation efficiency and safety. “(d) Construction of Transportation Infrastructure for Law Enforcement Purposes.—At the request of the Administrator of General Services, in consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary may transfer, during the period of fiscal years 1998 through 2001, not more than $10,000,000 of the amounts made available by section 1101 [set out in part as a note below] to carry out this section and section 1118 [set out above] to the Administrator of General Services for the construction of transportation infrastructure necessary for law enforcement in border States. “(e) Definitions.—In this section, the following definitions apply:“(1) Border region.—The term ‘border region’ means the portion of a border State in the vicinity of an international border with Canada or Mexico. “(2) Border state.—The term ‘border State’ means any State that has a boundary in common with Canada or Mexico.”

Highway Economic Requirement System

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1213(a), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 199, provided that: “(1) Methodology.—“(A) Evaluation.—The Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct an evaluation of the methodology used by the Department of Transportation to determine highway needs using the highway economic requirement system (in this subsection referred to as the ‘model’). “(B) Required element.—The evaluation shall include an assessment of the extent to which the model estimates an optimal level of highway infrastructure investment, including an assessment as to when the model may be overestimating or underestimating investment requirements. “(C) Report to congress.—Not later than 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act [June 9, 1998], the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the evaluation. “(2) State investment plans.—“(A) Study.—In consultation with State transportation departments and other appropriate State and local officials, the Comptroller General of the United States shall conduct a study on the extent to which the model can be used to provide States with useful information for developing State transportation investment plans and State infrastructure investment projections. “(B) Required elements.—The study shall—“(i) identify any additional data that may need to be collected beyond the data submitted, before the date of enactment of this Act, to the Federal Highway Administration through the highway performance monitoring system; and “(ii) identify what additional work, if any, would be required of the Federal Highway Administration and the States to make the model useful at the State level. “(C) Report to congress.—Not later than 3 years after the date of enactment of this Act, the Comptroller General shall submit to Congress a report on the results of the study.”

Southwest Border Transportation Infrastructure

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1213(d), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 200, provided that: “(1) Assessment.—The Secretary shall conduct a comprehensive assessment of the state of the transportation infrastructure on the southwest border between the United States and Mexico (in this subsection referred to as the ‘border’). “(2) Consultation.—In carrying out the assessment, the Secretary shall consult with—“(A) the Secretary of State; “(B) the Attorney General; “(C) the Secretary of the Treasury; “(D) the Commandant of the Coast Guard; “(E) the Administrator of General Services; “(F) the American Commissioner on the International Boundary Commission, United States and Mexico; “(G) State agencies responsible for transportation and law enforcement in border States; and “(H) municipal governments and transportation authorities in sister cities in the border area. “(3) Requirements.—In carrying out the assessment, the Secretary shall—“(A) assess the flow of commercial and private traffic through designated ports of entry on the border; “(B) assess the adequacy of transportation infrastructure in the border area, including highways, bridges, railway lines, and border inspection facilities; “(C) assess the adequacy of law enforcement and narcotics abatement activities in the border area, as the activities relate to commercial and private traffic and infrastructure; “(D) assess future demands on transportation infrastructure in the border area; and “(E) make recommendations to facilitate legitimate cross-border traffic in the border area, while maintaining the integrity of the border. “(4) Report.—Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this Act [June 9, 1998], the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report on the assessment conducted under this subsection, including any related legislative and administrative recommendations.”

Transportation, Community, and System Preservation Program

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1117(a)–(g), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1177, 1178, provided that: “(a) Establishment.—In cooperation with appropriate State, tribal, regional, and local governments, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall establish a comprehensive program to address the relationships among transportation, community, and system preservation plans and practices and identify private sector-based initiatives to improve such relationships. “(b) Purpose.—Through the program under this section, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall facilitate the planning, development, and implementation of strategies to integrate transportation, community, and system preservation plans and practices that address one or more of the following:“(1) Improve the efficiency of the transportation system of the United States. “(2) Reduce the impacts of transportation on the environment. “(3) Reduce the need for costly future investments in public infrastructure. “(4) Provide efficient access to jobs, services, and centers of trade. “(5) Examine community development patterns and identify strategies to encourage private sector development that achieves the purposes identified in paragraphs (1) through (4). “(c) General Authority.—The Secretary [of Transportation] shall allocate funds made available to carry out this section to States, metropolitan planning organizations, local governments, and tribal governments to carry out eligible projects to integrate transportation, community, and system preservation plans and practices. “(d) Eligibility.—A project described in subsection (c) is an eligible project under this section if the project—“(1) is eligible for assistance under title 23 or chapter 53 of title 49, United States Code; or “(2) is to conduct any other activity relating to transportation, community, and system preservation that the Secretary [of Transportation] determines to be appropriate, including corridor preservation activities that are necessary to implement one or more of the following:“(A) Transit-oriented development plans. “(B) Traffic calming measures. “(C) Other coordinated transportation, community, and system preservation practices. “(e) Criteria.—In allocating funds made available to carry out this section, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall give priority consideration to applicants that—“(1) have instituted preservation or development plans and programs that—“(A) are coordinated with State and local preservation or development plans, including transit-oriented development plans; “(B) promote cost-effective and strategic investments in transportation infrastructure that minimize adverse impacts on the environment; or “(C) promote innovative private sector strategies; “(2) have instituted other policies to integrate transportation, community, and system preservation practices, such as—“(A) spending policies that direct funds to high-growth areas; “(B) urban growth boundaries to guide metropolitan expansion; “(C) ‘green corridors’ programs that provide access to major highway corridors for areas targeted for efficient and compact development; or “(D) other similar programs or policies as determined by the Secretary; “(3) have preservation or development policies that include a mechanism for reducing potential impacts of transportation activities on the environment; “(4) demonstrate a commitment to public and private involvement, including the involvement of nontraditional partners in the project team; and “(5) examine ways to encourage private sector investments that address the purposes of this section. “(f) Equitable Distribution.—In allocating funds to carry out this section, the Secretary [of Transportation] shall ensure the equitable distribution of funds to a diversity of populations and geographic regions. “(g) Funding.—“(1) In general.—There is authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this section $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2005 and $61,250,000 for each of fiscal years 2006 through 2009. “(2) Contract authority.—Funds made available to carry out this section shall be available for obligation in the same manner as if the funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23, United States Code; except that such funds shall not be transferable, and the Federal share for projects and activities carried out with such funds shall be determined in accordance with section 120(b) of title 23, United States Code.”

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1221, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 221, as amended by Pub. L. 108–88, § 5(a)(9), Sept. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 1114; Pub. L. 108–202, § 5(a)(9), Feb. 29, 2004, 118 Stat. 481; Pub. L. 108–224, § 4(a)(9), Apr. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 629; Pub. L. 108–263, § 4(a)(9), June 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 700; Pub. L. 108–280, § 4(a)(9), July 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 879; Pub. L. 108–310, § 5(a)(9), Sept. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 1149; Pub. L. 109–14, § 4(a)(9), May 31, 2005, 119 Stat. 327; Pub. L. 109–20, § 4(a)(9), July 1, 2005, 119 Stat. 348; Pub. L. 109–35, § 4(a)(9), July 20, 2005, 119 Stat. 381; Pub. L. 109–37, § 4(a)(9), July 22, 2005, 119 Stat. 396; Pub. L. 109–40, § 4(a)(9), July 28, 2005, 119 Stat. 412, which related to a transportation and community and system preservation pilot program and authorized appropriations to carry out such program through July 30, 2005, was repealed by Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1117(h), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1179.

Transportation Assistance for Olympic Cities

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1223, June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 224, as amended by Pub. L. 105–206, title IX, § 9003(j), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 842, provided that: “(a) Purpose.—The purpose of this section is to authorize the provision of assistance for, and support of, State and local efforts concerning surface transportation issues necessary to obtain the national recognition and economic benefits of participation in the International Olympic movement, the International Paralympic movement, and the Special Olympics International movement by hosting international quadrennial Olympic and Paralympic events, and Special Olympics International events, in the United States. “(b) Priority for Transportation Projects Relating to Olympic, Paralympic, and Special Olympic Events.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, from funds available to carry out [former] sections 118(c) and 144(g)(1) of title 23, United States Code, the Secretary may give priority to funding for a transportation project relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event, or a Special Olympics International event, if—“(1) the project meets the extraordinary needs associated with an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event or a Special Olympics International event; and “(2) the project is otherwise eligible for assistance under [former] sections 118(c) and 144(g)(1) of such title. “(c) Transportation Planning Activities.—The Secretary may participate in—“(1) planning activities of States and metropolitan planning organizations and transportation projects relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event, or a Special Olympics International event, under sections 134 and 135 of title 23, United States Code; and “(2) developing intermodal transportation plans necessary for the projects in coordination with State and local transportation agencies. “(d) Funding.—Notwithstanding section 5001(a) [112 Stat. 419], from funds made available under such section, the Secretary may provide assistance for the development of an Olympic, a Paralympic, and a Special Olympics transportation management plan in cooperation with an Olympic Organizing Committee responsible for hosting, and State and local communities affected by, an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event or a Special Olympics International event. “(e) Transportation Projects Relating to Olympic, Paralympic, and Special Olympic Events.—“(1) In general.—The Secretary may provide assistance, including planning, capital, and operating assistance, to States and local governments in carrying out transportation projects relating to an international quadrennial Olympic or Paralympic event or a Special Olympics International event. “(2) Federal share.—The Federal share of the cost of a project assisted under this subsection shall not exceed 80 percent. “(f) Eligible Governments.—A State or local government shall be eligible to receive assistance under this section only if the government is hosting a venue that is part of an international quadrennial Olympics that is officially selected by the International Olympic Committee or Special Olympics International. “(g) Authorization of Appropriations.—There are authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) to carry out this section such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 1998 through 2003.”

Discretionary Grant Selection Criteria and Process

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1311, as added by Pub. L. 105–206, title IX, § 9004(a), July 22, 1998, 112 Stat. 842, provided that: “(a) Establishment of Criteria.—The Secretary shall establish criteria for all discretionary programs funded from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account). To the extent practicable, such criteria shall conform to the Executive Order No. 12893 [31 U.S.C. 501 note] (relating to infrastructure investment). “(b) Selection Process.—“(1) Limitation on acceptance of applications.—Before accepting applications for grants under any discretionary program for which funds are authorized to be appropriated from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) by this Act [see Tables for classification] (including the amendments made by this Act), the Secretary shall publish the criteria established under subsection (a). Such publication shall identify all statutory criteria and any criteria established by regulation that will apply to the program. “(2) Explanation.—Not less often than quarterly, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee on Environment and Public Works of the Senate and the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House of Representatives a list of the projects selected under discretionary programs funded from the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) and an explanation of how the projects were selected based on the criteria established under subsection (a). “(c) Minimum Covered Programs.—At a minimum, the criteria established under subsection (a) and the selection process established by subsection (b) shall apply to the following programs:“(1) The intelligent transportation system deployment program under title V [see Tables for classification]. “(2) The national corridor planning and development program. “(3) The coordinated border infrastructure and safety program. “(4) The construction of ferry boats and ferry terminal facilities. “(5) The national scenic byways program. “(6) The Interstate discretionary program. “(7) The discretionary bridge program.”

Compliance With Buy American Act

Pub. L. 104–59, title III, § 359(c), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 627, directed Secretary of Transportation to conduct a study on compliance with Buy American Act (see 41 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.) with respect to contracts entered into using amounts made available from Highway Trust Fund and not later than 1 year after Nov. 28, 1995, transmit to Congress report on results.

Disadvantaged Business Enterprises

Pub. L. 117–58, div. A, title I, § 11101(e), Nov. 15, 2021, 135 Stat. 448, provided that: “(1) Findings.—Congress finds that—“(A) while significant progress has occurred due to the establishment of the disadvantaged business enterprise program, discrimination and related barriers continue to pose significant obstacles for minority- and women-owned businesses seeking to do business in Federally assisted surface transportation markets across the United States; “(B) the continuing barriers described in subparagraph (A) merit the continuation of the disadvantaged business enterprise program; “(C) Congress has received and reviewed testimony and documentation of race and gender discrimination from numerous sources, including congressional hearings and roundtables, scientific reports, reports issued by public and private agencies, news stories, reports of discrimination by organizations and individuals, and discrimination lawsuits, which show that race- and gender-neutral efforts alone are insufficient to address the problem; “(D) the testimony and documentation described in subparagraph (C) demonstrate that discrimination across the United States poses a barrier to full and fair participation in surface transportation-related businesses of women business owners and minority business owners and has impacted firm development and many aspects of surface transportation-related business in the public and private markets; and “(E) the testimony and documentation described in subparagraph (C) provide a strong basis that there is a compelling need for the continuation of the disadvantaged business enterprise program to address race and gender discrimination in surface transportation-related business. “(2) Definitions.—In this subsection:“(A) Small business concern.—“(i) In general.—The term ‘small business concern’ means a small business concern (as the term is used in section 3 of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 632)). “(ii) Exclusions.—The term ‘small business concern’ does not include any concern or group of concerns controlled by the same socially and economically disadvantaged individual or individuals that have average annual gross receipts during the preceding 3 fiscal years in excess of $26,290,000, as adjusted annually by the Secretary [of Transportation] for inflation. “(B) Socially and economically disadvantaged individuals.—The term ‘socially and economically disadvantaged individuals’ has the meaning given the term in section 8(d) of the Small Business Act (15 U.S.C. 637(d)) and relevant subcontracting regulations issued pursuant to that Act [15 U.S.C. 631 et seq.], except that women shall be presumed to be socially and economically disadvantaged individuals for purposes of this subsection. “(3) Amounts for small business concerns.—Except to the extent that the Secretary determines otherwise, not less than 10 percent of the amounts made available for any program under this division [see Tables for classification] (other than section 14004 [amending section 202 of this title]), division C [amending section 601 of this title and sections 5302 to 5305, 5309, 5311, 5312, 5318, 5323, 5324, 5329, and 5334 to 5339 of Title 49, Transportation, enacting provisions set out as notes under sections 5312, 5329, and 5336 of Title 49, and amending provisions set out as notes under sections 5303 and 5309 of Title 49], and section 403 of title 23, United States Code, shall be expended through small business concerns owned and controlled by socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. “(4) Annual listing of disadvantaged business enterprises.—Each State shall annually—“(A) survey and compile a list of the small business concerns referred to in paragraph (3) in the State, including the location of the small business concerns in the State; and “(B) notify the Secretary, in writing, of the percentage of the small business concerns that are controlled by—“(i) women; “(ii) socially and economically disadvantaged individuals (other than women); and “(iii) individuals who are women and are otherwise socially and economically disadvantaged individuals. “(5) Uniform certification.—“(A) In general.—The Secretary shall establish minimum uniform criteria for use by State governments in certifying whether a concern qualifies as a small business concern for the purpose of this subsection. “(B) Inclusions.—The minimum uniform criteria established under subparagraph (A) shall include, with respect to a potential small business concern—“(i) on-site visits; “(ii) personal interviews with personnel; “(iii) issuance or inspection of licenses; “(iv) analyses of stock ownership; “(v) listings of equipment; “(vi) analyses of bonding capacity; “(vii) listings of work completed; “(viii) examination of the resumes of principal owners; “(ix) analyses of financial capacity; and “(x) analyses of the type of work preferred. “(6) Reporting.—The Secretary shall establish minimum requirements for use by State governments in reporting to the Secretary—“(A) information concerning disadvantaged business enterprise awards, commitments, and achievements; and “(B) such other information as the Secretary determines to be appropriate for the proper monitoring of the disadvantaged business enterprise program. “(7) Compliance with court orders.—Nothing in this subsection limits the eligibility of an individual or entity to receive funds made available under this division, division C, and section 403 of title 23, United States Code, if the entity or person is prevented, in whole or in part, from complying with paragraph (3) because a Federal court issues a final order in which the court finds that a requirement or the implementation of paragraph (3) is unconstitutional. “(8) Sense of congress on prompt payment of dbe subcontractors.—It is the sense of Congress that—“(A) the Secretary should take additional steps to ensure that recipients comply with section 26.29 of title 49, Code of Federal Regulations (the disadvantaged business enterprises prompt payment rule), or any corresponding regulation, in awarding Federally funded transportation contracts under laws and regulations administered by the Secretary; and “(B) such additional steps should include increasing the ability of the Department [of Transportation] to track and keep records of complaints and to make that information publicly available.”

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior acts:

Pub. L. 114–94, div. A, title I, § 1101(b), Dec. 4, 2015, 129 Stat. 1323.

Pub. L. 112–141, div. A, title I, § 1101(b), July 6, 2012, 126 Stat. 414.

Pub. L. 111–147, title IV, § 451, Mar. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 96.

Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1101(b), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1156, as amended by Pub. L. 110–244, title I, § 101(a), June 6, 2008, 122 Stat. 1573.

Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1101(b), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 113.

Pub. L. 102–240, title I, § 1003(b), Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 1919.

Pub. L. 100–17, title I, § 106(c), Apr. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 145.

Pub. L. 109–14, § 7(s), May 31, 2005, 119 Stat. 334, provided that: “Amounts made available under the amendments made by this section [amending sections 5307, 5309, and 5338 of Title 49, Transportation, and provisions set out as notes under section 322 of this title and sections 5307, 5309, 5310, and 5338 of Title 49] shall be treated for purposes of section 1101(b) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century [Pub. L. 105–178] (23 U.S.C. 101 note) as amounts made available for programs under title III of such Act [see Tables for classification].”

Similar provisions were contained in the following prior acts:

Pub. L. 108–310, § 8(t), Sept. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 1158.

Pub. L. 108–88, § 8(t), Sept. 30, 2003, 117 Stat. 1126, as amended by Pub. L. 108–202, § 9(t), Feb. 29, 2004, 118 Stat. 489; Pub. L. 108–224, § 7(t), Apr. 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 637; Pub. L. 108–263, § 7(t), June 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 708; Pub. L. 108–280, § 7(t), July 30, 2004, 118 Stat. 885.

Highway Use Tax Evasion Projects

Pub. L. 102–240, title I, § 1040, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 1992, as amended by Pub. L. 104–59, title III, § 325(f), Nov. 28, 1995, 109 Stat. 592; Pub. L. 104–66, title I, § 1122(b), Dec. 21, 1995, 109 Stat. 725; Pub. L. 105–130, § 5(c)(1), Dec. 1, 1997, 111 Stat. 2557, related to highway use tax evasion projects, prior to repeal by Pub. L. 105–178, title I, § 1114(b)(2), June 9, 1998, 112 Stat. 154. See section 143 of this title.

Scenic Byways Program

Pub. L. 102–240, title I, § 1047, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 1996, as amended by Pub. L. 105–130, § 5(c)(2), Dec. 1, 1997, 111 Stat. 2557, provided that: “(a) Scenic Byways Advisory Committee.—“(1) Establishment.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the Secretary shall establish in the Department of Transportation an advisory committee to assist the Secretary with respect to establishment of a national scenic byways program under title 23, United States Code. “(2) Membership.—The advisory committee established under this section shall be composed of 17 members as follows:“(A) The Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration or the designee of the Administrator who shall serve as chairman of the advisory committee. “(B) The Chief of the Forest Service of the Department of Agriculture or the designee of the Chief. “(C) The Director of the National Park Service of the Department of the Interior or the designee of the Director. “(D) The Director of the Bureau of Land Management of the Department of the Interior or the designee of the Director. “(E) The Under Secretary for Travel and Tourism of the Department of Commerce or the designee of the Under Secretary. “(F) The Assistant Secretary for Indian Affairs of the Department of the Interior or the designee of the Assistant Secretary. “(G) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent the interests of conservationists on the advisory committee. “(H) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary of Transportation who is specially qualified to represent the interests of recreational users of scenic byways on the advisory committee. “(I) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent the interests of the tourism industry on the advisory committee. “(J) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent the interests of historic preservationists on the advisory committee. “(K) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent the interests of highway users on the advisory committee. “(L) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary to represent State highway and transportation officials. “(M) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary to represent local highway and transportation officials. “(N) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to serve on the advisory committee as a planner. “(O) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent the motoring public. “(P) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who is specially qualified to represent groups interested in scenic preservation. “(Q) 1 individual appointed by the Secretary who represents the outdoor advertising industry. Individuals appointed as members of the advisory committee under subparagraphs (G) through (P) may be State and local government officials. Members shall serve without compensation other than for reasonable expenses incident to functions of the advisory committee. “(3) Functions.—The advisory committee established under this subsection shall develop and make to the Secretary recommendations regarding minimum criteria for use by State and Federal agencies in designating highways as scenic byways and as all-American roads for purposes of a national scenic byways program to be established under title 23, United States Code. Such recommendations shall include recommendations on the following:“(A) Consideration of the scenic beauty and historic significance of highways proposed for designation as scenic byways and all-American roads and the areas surrounding such highways. “(B) Operation and management standards for highways designated as scenic byways and all-American roads, including strategies for maintaining or improving the qualities for which a highway is designated as a scenic byway or all-American road, for protecting and enhancing the landscape and view corridors surrounding such a highway, and for minimizing traffic congestion on such a highway. “(C)(i) Standards for scenic byway-related signs, including those which identify highways as scenic byways and all-American roads. “(ii) The advisability of uniform signs identifying highways as components of the scenic byway system. “(D) Standards for maintaining highway safety on the scenic byway system. “(E) Design review procedures for location of highway facilities, landscaping, and travelers’ facilities on the scenic byway system. “(F) Procedures for reviewing and terminating the designation of a highway designated as a scenic byway. “(G) Such other matters as the advisory committee may deem appropriate. “(H) Such other matters for which the Secretary may request recommendations. “(4) Report.—Not later than 18 months after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the advisory committee established under this section shall submit to the Secretary and Congress a report containing the recommendations described in paragraph (3). “(b) Technical and Financial Assistance.—The Secretary shall provide technical assistance to the States (as such term is defined under section 101 of title 23, United States Code) and shall make grants to the States for the planning, design, and development of State scenic byway programs. “(c) Federal Share.—The Federal share payable for the costs of planning, design, and development of State scenic byway programs under this section shall be 80 percent. “(d) Funding.—There shall be available to the Secretary for carrying out this section (other than subsection (f)), out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), $1,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $3,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, $4,000,000 for fiscal year 1994, $14,000,000 for each of the fiscal years 1995, 1996, and 1997, and $7,000,000 for the period of October 1, 1997, through March 31, 1998. Such sums shall remain available until expended. “(e) Contract Authority.—Notwithstanding any other provision of law, approval by the Secretary of a grant under this section shall be deemed a contractual obligation of the United States for payment of the Federal share of the cost of activities for which the grant is being made. “(f) Interim Scenic Byways Program.—“(1) Grant program.—During fiscal years 1992, 1993, and 1994, the Secretary may make grants to any State which has a scenic highway program for carrying out eligible projects on highways which the State has designated as scenic byways. “(2) Priority projects.—In making grants under paragraph (1), the Secretary shall give priority to—“(A) those eligible projects which are included in a corridor management plan for maintaining scenic, historic, recreational, cultural, and archeological characteristics of the corridor while providing for accommodation of increased tourism and development of related amenities; “(B) those eligible projects for which a strong local commitment is demonstrated for implementing the management plans and protecting the characteristics for which the highway is likely to be designated as a scenic byway; “(C) those eligible projects which are included in programs which can serve as models for other States to follow when establishing and designing scenic byways on an intrastate or interstate basis; and “(D) those eligible projects in multi-State corridors where the States submit joint applications. “(3) Eligible projects.—The following are projects which are eligible for Federal assistance under this subsection:“(A) Planning, design, and development of State scenic byway programs. “(B) Making safety improvements to a highway designated as a scenic byway under this subsection to the extent such improvements are necessary to accommodate increased traffic, and changes in the types of vehicles using the highway, due to such designation. “(C) Construction along the highway of facilities for the use of pedestrians and bicyclists, rest areas, turnouts, highway shoulder improvements, passing lanes, overlooks, and interpretive facilities. “(D) Improvements to the highway which will enhance access to an area for the purpose of recreation, including water-related recreation. “(E) Protecting historical and cultural resources in areas adjacent to the highway. “(F) Developing and providing tourist information to the public, including interpretive information about the scenic byway. “(4) Federal share.—The Federal share payable for the costs of carrying out projects and developing programs under this subsection with funds made available pursuant to this subsection shall be 80 percent. “(5) Funding.—There shall be available to the Secretary for carrying out this subsection, out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account), $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1992, $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1993, and $10,000,000 for fiscal year 1994. Such sums shall remain available until expended. “(g) Limitation.—The Secretary shall not make a grant under this section for any project which would not protect the scenic, historic, recreational, cultural, natural, and archeological integrity of the highway and adjacent area. The Secretary may not use more than 10 percent of the funds authorized for each fiscal year under subsection (f)(5) for removal of any outdoor advertising sign, display, or device. “(h) Treatment of Scenic Highways in Oregon.—For purposes of this section, a highway designated as a scenic highway in the State of Oregon shall be treated as a scenic byway.”

Commemoration of Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways

Pub. L. 102–240, title VI, § 6012, Dec. 18, 1991, 105 Stat. 2180, provided that: “(a) Study.—The Secretary shall conduct a study to determine an appropriate symbol or emblem to be placed on highway signs referring to the Interstate System to commemorate the vision of President Dwight D. Eisenhower in creating the Dwight D. Eisenhower National System of Interstate and Defense Highways [now Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways]. “(b) Report.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act [Dec. 18, 1991], the Secretary shall transmit to Congress a report on the results of the study under this section.”

Designation of National System of Interstate and Defense Highways as The Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways

Pub. L. 101–427, Oct. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 927, as amended by Pub. L. 107–217, § 6(b), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1304; Pub. L. 108–178, § 2(b)(3), Dec. 15, 2003, 117 Stat. 2640, provided: “That— “(a) notwithstanding any other provision of law, The National System of Interstate and Defense Highways shall be redesignated as ‘The Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways’; and “(b) any reference before the date of enactment of this Act [Oct. 15, 1990] in any provision of law, regulation, map, sign, or otherwise to The National System of Interstate and Defense Highways shall be deemed to refer, on and after such date, to The Dwight D. Eisenhower System of Interstate and Defense Highways.”

Signs Identifying Funding Sources

Pub. L. 100–17, title I, § 154, Apr. 2, 1987, 101 Stat. 209, which related to erection of signs indicating sources of funding on projects under construction with funds from the Highway Trust Fund, was repealed and restated in section 321 of this title by Pub. L. 109–59, title I, § 1901(a), (c), Aug. 10, 2005, 119 Stat. 1464.