This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-02-721R entitled 'Highway Projects: Extent of Unobligated Balances for Demonstration Projects as of March 31, 2002' which was released on July 08, 2002. This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a longer term project to improve GAO products’ accessibility. Every attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as alternative text descriptions for reformatted tables and agency comment letters, are provided but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format in the printed version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail your comments regarding contents or accessibility features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. June 5, 2002: The Honorable Harold Rogers: Chairman: The Honorable Martin Olav Sabo: Ranking Minority Member: Subcommittee on Transportation and Related Agencies: Committee on Appropriations: House of Representatives: Subject: Highway Projects: Extent of Unobligated Balances for Demonstration Projects as of March 31, 2002: Congress has provided funding for numerous highway demonstration projects in legislation authorizing surface transportation programs as well as in annual appropriations acts for the Department of Transportation (DOT). In some cases, the projects are identified in the legislation itself. In others, they are identified in committee reports accompanying the legislation. These projects are all designated for specific locations within states and for specific purposes, and funds made available for them generally remain available until expended. In order to identify funds that could be rescinded, you asked us to identify highway demonstration projects with unobligated balances that are no longer needed, and the amount of these balances. Results: As of March 31, 2002, there were 30 highway demonstration projects with unobligated balances that were no longer needed by the states. [Footnote 1] These projects accounted for about $5.6 million in unobligated funds. These funds were provided in authorization or appropriations acts enacted from 1978 through 1994. Table 1 in the enclosure specifies the budget authority made available and the obligated and unobligated amounts for each of the projects with unobligated balances as of March 31, 2002; lists the statute(s) and, where appropriate, committee report(s) identifying the projects, beginning with the most recent, and describes briefly the location and nature of the projects. We also found that 8 of the 30 projects have very small unobligated balances of less that $1.50 each, and we have provided that information to your staff. Scope and Methodology: To identify highway demonstration projects with unobligated balances, we requested that the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) analyze reports from DOT’s fiscal management information system (FMIS) and verify the information with state officials. We verified the statutory sources of the projects and their descriptions by reviewing the statutes and associated reports. We relied on FMIS to identify the amount of budget authority and obligated and unobligated amounts for each project and did not independently verify this information. We conducted our review in April and May 2002 in accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. Agency Comments: We provided DOT with a draft of this letter for review and comment. DOT agreed with the information in the draft letter and provided technical comments, which we incorporated as appropriate. As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 30 days after the draft of the report. At that time, we will send copies of this letter to the Secretary of Transportation, the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration, the Senate Committee on Appropriations, the Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works, and the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure. The letter will also be available on GAO’s Web site at http://www.gao.gov . If you have any questions or need assistance, please contact me or Katherine Siggerud at (202) 512-2834. Other key contributors to this letter were Alex Lawrence and Bonnie Pignatiello Leer. JayEtta Hecker, Director, Physical Infrastructure Issues: Signed by JayEtta Hecker. Enclosure: [End of Section] Enclosure: Table 1. Summary of Demonstration Projects with Unobligated Balances (as of March 31, 2002): State: Ohio; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 103- 331 (1994); Surface; Transportation; Projects; House Conference Report 103- 752; Project description: Intermodal terminal, Fearing Boulevard, Toledo, Ohio; Budget authority; $668,000.00; Obligations; $0.00; Unobligated balance; $668,000.00. State: Virginia; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 103-331 (1994); Surface; Transportation; Projects; House Conference Report 103- 752; Project description; 14th Street bridge lane addition, Virginia; Budget authority; 1,000,000.00; Obligations; 829,849.00; Unobligated balance; 170,151.00. State: Florida; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-388 (1992); Highway Projects (Highway Trust Fund); House Conference Report 102-924; Project description; Biscayne Boulevard/U.S. 1, connect Port/ Miami to Interstate 395; Budget authority; 2,400,000.00; Obligations; 1,808,927.00; Unobligated balance; 591,073.00. State: Washington, D.C.; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1107(b)(201)); Project description; Advanced composite bridge deck demonstration at Catholic University; Budget authority; 195,085.00; Obligations; 0.00; Unobligated balance; 195,085.00. State: Illinois; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1106(b)(2)(13)); Project description; Joliet, Illinois: for rehabilitation of Houbolt Road from Jefferson Street to Joliet Junior College and construction and interchange at Houbolt Road and Interstate 80; Budget authority; 975,428.00; Obligations; 818,828.60; Unobligated balance; 156,599.40. State: Illinois; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1107 (b)(105)); Project description; U.S. 24 road replacement: Crescent City to Illinois 1 in Watseka; 6.3 miles; Budget authority; 2,438,571.00; Obligations; 2,193,619.54; Unobligated balance; 244,951.46. State: Illinois; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1106(a)(2)(9)); Project description; East St. Louis, Illinois: feasibility study for 4-lane Access Road to Jefferson Memorial Park; Budget authority; 234,103.00; Obligations; 0.00; Unobligated balance; 234,103.00. State: Minnesota; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1107(b)(160)); Project description; St. Cloud, Minnesota: Trunk Highway15 bridge across Mississippi River and interchange with Trunk Highway 10; Budget authority; 3,160,388.00; Obligations; 3,079,685.88; Unobligated balance; 80,702.12. State: Ohio; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102- 240 (1991); (§1106(a)(2)(86)); Project description; Route 18 Bypass study, Medina, Ohio; Budget authority; 390,172.00; Obligations; 0.00; Unobligated balance; 390,172.00. State: North Dakota; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-143 (1991); Highway; Demonstration; Projects; House Conference Report 102-243; Project description; Highway beautification, Grand Forks, North Dakota; Budget authority; 800,000.00; Obligations; 785,010.31; Unobligated balance; 14,989.69. State: New Jersey; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-143 (1991); Highway Studies,; Feasibility--; Design,; Environmental,; Engineering; House Conference Report 102-243; Project description; Highway Study - Route 208/Route 4 interchange, New Jersey; Budget authority; $4,000,000.00; Obligations; $1,308,726.22; Unobligated balance; $2,691,273.78. State: Oregon; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102- 143 (1991); Highway Demonstration Projects; House Conference Report 102- 243; Project description; Highway 101 Tri-State Feasibility Study[A]; Budget authority; 270,000.00; Obligations; 217,309.88; Unobligated balance; 52,690.12. State: Washington; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-143 (1991); Highway Demonstration Projects; House Conference Report 102- 243; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1107(b)(39)); Project description; Bryden Canyon Bridge access, Clarkston, Washington; Budget authority; 3,600,000.00; Obligations; 3,585,502.46; Unobligated balance; 14,497.54. State: Washington; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 102-143 (1991); Highway Demonstration Projects; House Conference Report 102- 243; Public Law 102-240 (1991); (§1107(b)(39)); Bryden, Washington: construct 3 miles of new and improved highways connecting Clarkston, Washington, with Lewiston, Idaho; Budget authority; 3,804,171.00; Obligations; 3,798,028.84; Unobligated balance; 6,142.16. State: Illinois; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101-516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects; House Conference Report 101- 892; Public Law 102-143 (1991); Highway Demonstration Projects; House Conference Report 102-243; Project description; Bridge Construction - Hillsboro, Illinois; Budget authority; 1,280,000.00; Obligations; 1,212,660.05; Unobligated balance; 67,339.95. State: Arkansas; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101-516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 10,000.00; Obligations; 8,169.00; Unobligated balance; 1,831.00. State: Kentucky; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101-516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; $10,000.00; Obligations; $7,118.19; Unobligated balance; $2,881.81. State: Ohio; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101- 516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 2,500.00; Obligations; 0.00; Unobligated balance; 2424.00. State: Texas; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101- 516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 2,500.00; Obligations; 92.87; Unobligated balance; 2,407.13. State: Utah; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101- 516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 10,000.00; Obligations; 6,365.04; Unobligated balance; 3,634.96. State: Virginia; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101-516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 10,000.00; Obligations; 4,208.00; Unobligated balance; 5,792.00. State: West Virginia; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 101-516 (1990); Highway Demonstration Projects--; Preliminary Engineering; House Conference Report 101-892; Project description; Interstate 66 Feasibility Study[B]; Budget authority; 10,000.00; Obligations; 0.00; Unobligated balance; 10,000.00. State: Illinois; Public law, section, and related report; Public Law 97-424 (1983); (§131(j)(1)[C] ); Project description; A demonstration project for the purpose of showing the benefits of constructing usable segments of high-volume facilities and developing methods to achieve the effective implementation of massive capital investments made under federal programs that are being discontinued.; Budget authority; 97,663,821.08; Obligations; 97,661,227.33; Unobligated balance; 2,593.75. State: Total; Public law, section, and related report; [Empty]; Project description; [Empty]; Budget authority; $122,934,739.08; Obligations; $117,325,328.21; Unobligated balance; $5,609,334.87. Table Footnotes: [A] According to FHWA, The study included Oregon, California, and Washington. [B] According to FHWA, the study was originally authorized $1,275,000 and included 15 states: Arkansas, Arizona, Colorado, Illinois, Kansas, Kentucky, Missouri, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia. This report includes unobligated balances for this project in seven of these states. [C] Public Law 97-424 originally authorized $100,000,000 for this project. FHWA officials told us that subsequently, in accordance with Public Law 99-177 (1985), the project’s budget authority was reduced to $98,925,000. Public Law 104-59 (1995) rescinded $798,701 of the funds that had been made available for this project. We identified a $462,478 unobligated balance for this project in Highway Projects: Extent of Unobligated Balances for Demonstration Projects , (GAO-01-985R, August 17, 2001) and this was rescinded pursuant to Public Law 107-120 (2001). Subsequently, Illinois identified an additional $2,593.75 unobligated balance. Source: Adapted by GAO from information provided by the FHWA. [End of table] (544037): FOOTNOTES [1] We identified another set of demonstration projects with unobligated balances in 2001. See Highway Projects: Extent of Unobligated Balances for Demonstration Projects (GAO-01-985R, Aug. 17, 2001.)