Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works asks for more Money for the Tribal Transportation Program
Posted by nativelawpolicy
In a markup hearing this morning, the EPW unanimously approved the “Developing a Reliable and Innovative Vision for the Economy Act” (“DRIVE”). The bill proposes a six-year plan to address the transportation funding crisis and associated infrastructure shortfalls. Chairman Inhofe stated that the progression of the bill hinges on the elimination of red tape and redundancies that prevent large scale projects from being realized in a timely manner.
Although not discussed during today’s proceedings, the Act as it is currently written includes adjustments to the Tribal Transportation Program which would allocate more money for transportation projects on tribal land. The adjustments would set aside $460,000,000 for the 2016 fiscal year and would increase by $10,000,000 each consecutive FY up to $510,000,000 by 2021. The DRIVE Act also creates a “Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects Program” which would set aside funding for construction or maintenance projects sponsored by eligible Federal land management agencies or Indian tribes. Other amendments to Title 23 include a provision making tribal transportation facilities projects eligible for emergency assistance; also, the administrative expenses are expected to be cut from 6 percent to 5 percent while increasing the potential amount set aside for tribal transportation facilities bridges from 2 percent to 3 percent for each FY.
With just under forty days until the current highway program extension expires, the committee stressed the importance of continued bipartisan cooperation to ensure the creation of viable sources of revenue for the Act.
Below are excerpts from the DRIVE Act that impact Tribal transportation funds. The excerpts may be truncated.
Title I—Federal-Aid Highways
Subtitle A—Authorizations and Programs
Sec. 1001. Tribal Transportation Program.—
For the tribal transportation program under section 202 of title 23, United States Code—
- $470,000,000 for fiscal year 2017;
- $480,000,000 for fiscal year 2018;
- $490,000,000 for fiscal year 2019;
- $500,000,000 for fiscal year 2020; and
- $510,000,000 for fiscal year 2021.
Sec. 1022. Emergency Relief for Federally Owned Roads.
- —Section 125(d)(3) of title 23, United States Code, is amended—
- in subparagraph (A), by striking “or” at the end;
- in subparagraph (B), by striking the period at the end and inserting “; or”; and
- by adding at the end of the following:
“(C) projects eligible for assistance under this section located on tribal transportation facilities, Federal lands transportation facilities, or other federally owned roads that are open to public travel (as defined in subsection (e)(1)).”.
Sec. 1026. Tribal Transportation Program Amendment.
Section 202 of title 23, United States Code, is amended—
- in section (a)(6), by striking “6 percent” and inserting “5 percent”; and
- in subsection (d)(2), in the matter preceding subparagraph (A) by striking “2 percent” and inserting “3 percent”.
Sec. 1027. Nationally Significant Federal Lands and Tribal Projects Program.
- —The Secretary shall establish a nationally significant Federal lands and tribal projects program (referred to in this section as the “program”) to provide funding to construct, reconstruct, or rehabilitate nationally significant Federal lands and tribal transportation projects.
- Eligible Applicants.—
- In General.—Except as provided in paragraph (2), entities eligible to receive funds under sections 201, 202, 203, and 204 of title 23, United States Code, may apply for funding under the program.
- Special Rule.—A State, county, or unit of local government may only apply for funding under the program if sponsored by an eligible Federal land management agency or Indian tribe.
- Eligible Projects.—An eligible project under the program shall be a single continuous project—
- on a Federal lands transportation facility, a Federal lands access transportation facility, or a Tribal transportation facility (as those terms are defined in section 101 of title 23, United States Code), except that such facility is not required to be included on an inventory described in sections 202 or 203 of title 23, United States Code;
- for which completion of activities required under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.) has been demonstrated through—
- a record of decision with respect to the project;
- a finding that the project has no significant impact; or
- a determination that the project is categorically excluded; and
- having an estimated cost, based on the results of preliminary engineering, equal to or exceeding $25,000,000, with priority consideration given to projects with an estimated cost equal to or exceeding $50,000,000.
- Eligible Activities.—
- In General—Subject to paragraph (2), an eligible applicant receiving funds under the program may only use the funds for construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation activities.
- Selection Criteria.—In selecting a project to receive funds under the program, the Secretary shall consider the extent to which the project—
- furthers the goals of the Department, including state of good repair, environmental sustainability, economic competitiveness, quality of life, and safety;
- improves the condition of critical multimodal transportation facilities;
- needs construction, reconstruction, or rehabilitation;
- is included in or eligible for inclusion in the National Register of Historic Places;
- enhances environmental ecosystems;
- uses new technologies and innovations that enhance the efficiency of the project;
- is supported by funds, other than the funds received under the program, to construct, maintain, and operate the facility;
- spans 2 or more States; and
- serves land owned by multiple Federal agencies or Indian tribes.
Sec. 2101. Tribal Data Collection.
Section 201(c)(6) of title 23, United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the following:
“(C) Tribal Data Collection.—In addition to the data to be collected under subparagraph (A), not later than 90 days after the end of each fiscal year, any entity carrying out a project under the tribal transportation program under section 202 shall submit to the Secretary and the Secretary of the Interior, based on obligations and expenditures under the tribal transportation program during the preceding fiscal year, the following data:
“(i) The names of projects or activities carried out by the entity under the tribal transportation program during the preceding fiscal year.
“(ii) A description of the projects or activities identified under clause (i).
“(iii) The current status of the projects or activities identified under clause (i).
“(iv) An estimate of the number of jobs created and the number of jobs retained by the projects or activities identified under clause (i).”.
Title VI—Extension of Federal-Aid Highway Programs
Sec. 6001. Extension of Federal-Aid Highway Programs.
(c) Tribal High Priority Projects Program.–
Section 1123(h)(1) of MAP-21 (23 U.S.C. 202 note; Public Law 112-141) is amended—
- by striking “$24,986,301” and inserting “$30,000,000”; and
by striking “July 31, 2015” and inserting “September 30, 2015″.
Posted in Uncategorized
Tags: bureau of indian affairs, chairman graves, chairman shuster, Congress, congressional priorities, Democrats, department of transportation, federal funding, federal highways, federal spending, fuel tax, highway bill, highway trust fund, indian law policy, native american attorneys, native american policy, native law, native policy, senate enivornmental and public works committee, senator inhoffe, transportation, transportation reauthorization, tribal transportation funding, United States Senate
Posted by nativelawpolicy
The Senate passed late in May a two month extension of the highway funding bill by voice vote, avoiding an abrupt halt in infrastructure spending and pushing off a debate over how to finance road construction in the long term. This vote came on top of a hectic week as politicians struggled to compromise on President Obama’s trade agenda and surveillance programs. The vote extending the decision on the highway bill and trust fund avoided a deal on how to finance a longer term highway policy. The Transportation Department said that with the extension, the trust fund had enough money to last until the middle of the summer.
So while the highway bill was the least contentious of the issues debated that week, leadership on both sides agree that finding the $15 billion at least needed a year for a 6 year highway bill will not be easy. But Republicans are expected to push for a short term funding extension till the end of the year, which would make for a count of some two dozen extensions over the past 12 years. However, Democrats are strongly opposed to another other short term fix.
Not surprisingly The Senate Environmental and Public Works Committee is expected to mark up a six year highway policy bill in late June, putting pressure on the finance committee to come up with the funding. Both parties have suggested tax reform as a solution. President Obama released a plan this year that would tax offshore income at 14 percent rate, and use the revenue to replenish the highway fund. But it is uncertain, if there is enough revenue from offshore profits to both fund highways, and still cut corporate tax rates as both Obama and Senate Republicans want to do. Many obstacles are facing tax reform, such as a small business lobby’s push to block any tax reform deal that doesn’t cut tax rates for individuals. Other lobbies have pushed for a corporate tax holiday to help fund roads, but it is anyone guess how much traction any of these proposals will gain.
Bottom-line, there will be a push for a short term extension till the end of the year of the Highway trust fund, but the Democrats are adamant that Republicans need to make highways a larger priority and will fight hard against anymore short term funding extensions. Meanwhile we can expect to see a mark-up on the re authorization or highway policy bill by the end June. At the least, this mark will reveal the level of spending that lawmakers will push for highways, and whether programs such as Tribal Transportation can expect increases in funding or changes in policy.
Tags: highway bill, highway funding, highway trust fund, map-21, moving ahead for progress, public works committee, senate enivornmental and public works committee, transportation reauthorization, United States Senate