The Safe, Accountable, Flexible and Efficient
Transportation Equity Act of 2003

TITLE II - HIGHWAY SAFETY

SEC. 2001. HIGHWAY SAFETY PROGRAMS. [Legislation]

Subsection (a) of this section would amend subsection (k) of section 402 ("Highway safety programs") of title 23, U.S.C., by revising the subsection to provide, in addition to other grants authorized by section 402, two separate grants to the States based upon the performance of their highway safety programs -- general performance grants under subsection (k)(1) and safety belt performance grants under subsection (k)(2). Both performance grants would be funded under section 2005 of this Act. Funds authorized to carry out subsection (k) in a fiscal year would be subject to a deduction not to exceed 5 percent for the necessary costs of administering the subsection.

Subsection (k)(1) would establish general performance grants. On or before December 31, 2003, and on or before each December 31 thereafter through December 31, 2008, the Secretary would be required to make grants to States based upon the performance of their highway safety programs in a calendar year in three categories: (1) motor vehicle crash fatalities; (2) alcohol-related crash fatalities; and (3) motorcycle, bicycle, and pedestrian crash fatalities.

The Secretary, through a rulemaking, would determine the measures for calculating and scoring performance in each of the three categories. These measures would use the data for the most recent calendar year for which the data are available from (i) fatality data provided by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) ; and (ii) vehicle miles traveled determined by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). The Secretary would set separate goals in each category for achievement and annual progress that reflect the potential of each goal to save lives, and also establish a weighting system for all of the goals that reflects the relative potential of each goal to save lives.

A State's achievement would be determined by comparing the State's performance in each of the three categories in a calendar year to levels that represent high achievement, as determined by the Secretary in rulemaking. A State's annual progress would be determined by comparing the State's performance in each of the three categories in a calendar year to its performance in those categories for the prior calendar year. For each of the three categories, the same measure would be used to assess both achievement and annual progress. Within each of these categories, a State may qualify for either an achievement or an annual progress award, but not both. A State would receive whichever award is of greater benefit to the State.

The Secretary would determine the amount of funds available to a State in a fiscal year for grants under subsection (k)(1) based on the State's achievement or annual progress in each of the categories, using the measures, goals and weighting system established under the subsection, the amount appropriated to carry out the grants for such fiscal year, and the ratio that the funds apportioned to the State under section 402(c) of title 23, U.S.C., for such fiscal year bears to the funds apportioned under section 402(c) for such fiscal year to all the States that qualify for a grant for such fiscal year.

Subsection (k)(2), safety belt performance grants, would establish a program to: (1) encourage States to adopt and enforce primary safety belt laws, and (2) increase the rate of safety belt use.

The Department strongly believes that enforcement of safety belt laws without restrictions, generally known and understood as primary safety belt laws, is one of the most effective ways for a State to reduce the loss of life on its highways and to protect its citizens against impaired drivers. Currently, 18 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico have primary safety belt laws. Thirty-two States have secondary enforcement laws and one State has no adult safety belt use law.

Safety belts are the most effective tool we have to mitigate the effects of motor vehicle crashes. These safety devices reduce the chance of fatal injury by half, and save an estimated 13,000 lives each year throughout the United States. In a May 2002 study, "The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes," based on calendar year 2000 data, the Department highlighted the vital importance of safety belt use. In addition to the lives they save, safety belts also prevent an estimated 325,000 serious injuries each year, and save $50 billion in medical care, lost productivity, and other injury-related costs. Conversely, the study showed that the failure of crash victims to wear safety belts leads to an estimated 9,200 unnecessary fatalities each year and 143,000 avoidable injuries, costing society $26 billion.

Safety belt use is much higher, on average, in States that provide for primary safety belt laws. In States with "secondary" safety belt laws, a motorist may be ticketed for failure to wear a safety belt only if there is a separate basis for stopping the motorist, such as the violation of a separate traffic law. This restriction hampers enforcement of the law. In States with primary laws, a citation can be issued solely because of a failure to wear safety belts.

The Department's analysis of NHTSA's data on restraint use among occupants of motor vehicles shows that primary enforcement is the most important aspect of a safety belt law affecting the rate of safety belt use. For virtually all States with a primary law, statistically significant increases associated with the presence of such a law were detected using several different methods. The analysis suggests that the increase in use rates attributable to the enactment of a primary law is at least 10-15 percentage points. This increase in safety belt use translates into a 5.9 percent decline in fatalities in a State that authorizes primary enforcement. In California and Louisiana -- States that upgraded their laws to allow for primary enforcement - safety belt use increased by 13 and 17 percentage points, respectively. This is important because every 1 percent increase in nationwide safety belt use translates into a savings of about 250 lives, the mitigation of 4,200 serious injuries, and a saving to the American economy of $800 million each year in economic costs.

Subsection (k)(2)(A)(i) would provide that, for fiscal years 2004 and 2005, the Secretary must make a grant to each State that enacted, and is enforcing, a primary safety belt use law for all passenger motor vehicles that became effective by December 31, 2002. In addition, subsection (k)(2)(A)(ii) would provide that, for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009, the Secretary, after making the previous grants, must make a one-time grant to each State that either (i) enacts for the first time after December 31, 2002, and has in effect a primary safety belt use law for all passenger motor vehicles, or, (ii) in the case of a State that does not have such a primary safety belt use law, has a State safety belt use rate in the preceding fiscal year of at least 90 percent, as measured under criteria determined by the Secretary.

Subparagraph (k)(2)(A)(iii) would provide that, of the funds authorized for grants under subsection (k), $100 million in each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009 would be available for grants. The amount of a grant available to a State in each of fiscal years 2004 and 2005 under subsection (k)(2)(A)(i) would be equal to one-half of the amount of funds apportioned to the State under subsection (c) of section 402 for fiscal year 2003. The amount of a grant available to a State in fiscal year 2004 or in a subsequent fiscal year under subsection (k)(2)(A)(ii) would be equal to five times the amount apportioned to the State for fiscal year 2003 under subsection (c) of section 402. Notwithstanding subsection (d) of section 402, the Federal share for grants under subsection (k)(2)(A)(iii) would be 100 percent. If the total amount of grants under subsection (k)(2)(A)(ii) for a fiscal year exceeds the amount of funds available in the fiscal year, grants would be made to each eligible State, in the order in which its primary safety belt use law became effective or its safety belt use rate reached 90 percent, until the funds for the fiscal year are exhausted. A State that does not receive a grant for which it is eligible in a fiscal year would receive the grant in the succeeding fiscal year so long as its law remains in effect or its safety belt use rate remains at or above 90 percent. If the total amount of grants under subsection (k)(2)(A)(iii) for a fiscal year is less than the amount available in the fiscal year, the Secretary shall use any funds that exceed the total amount for safety belt use rate grants under subsection (k)(2)(B).

Subsection (k)(2)(B) would provide that, on or before December 31, 2003, and on or before each December 31 thereafter through December 31, 2008, the Secretary must make grants to States based upon their safety belt use rate in the preceding fiscal year.

Under subsection (k)(2)(B)(i), the Secretary, through a rulemaking, would determine measures for calculating and scoring the performance for safety belt use rates, using data for the most recent calendar year for which data are available from observational safety belt surveys conducted in accordance with criteria established by the Secretary.

Under subsection (k)(2)(B)(ii), of the funds authorized for grants under subsection (k), $25,000,000 for fiscal year 2004, $27,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $28,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, $31,000,000 for fiscal year 2007, $34,000,000 for fiscal year 2008, and $37,000,000 for fiscal year 2009 would be available for safety belt use rate grants. The Secretary would determine the amount of funds available to a State in a fiscal year based on the State's achievement or annual progress in its safety belt use rate, the amount appropriated to carry out the grants for such fiscal year, and the ratio that the funds apportioned to the State under section 402(c) for such fiscal year bears to the funds apportioned under section 402(c) for such fiscal year to all the States that qualify for a grant for such fiscal year. Notwithstanding subsection (d) of section 402, the Federal share payable for safety belt use rate grants would be 100 percent.

Subsection (k)(2)(C) would provide that, for the purposes of subsection (k)(2), passenger motor vehicle means a passenger car, pickup truck, van, minivan, or sport utility vehicle, with a gross vehicle weight rating of less than 10,000 pounds.

Subsection (k)(3) would provide that a State allocated an amount for a grant under subsection (k)(1)(A) must use the amount for activities eligible for assistance under section 402, except that it may use up to 50 percent of the amount for activities eligible under section 150 of this title and consistent with the State's strategic highway safety plan under section 151of this title that are not otherwise eligible for assistance under section 402. A State allocated an amount for a grant under subsection (k)(2)(A) may use the amount for activities eligible for assistance under section 402 or for activities eligible under section 150 of this title and consistent with the State's strategic highway safety plan under section 151 of this title that are not otherwise eligible for assistance under section 402. A State allocated an amount for a grant under subsection (k)(2)(B), including any amount transferred under subsection (k)(2)(A), must use the amount for safety belt use programs eligible for assistance under section 402, except that it may use up to 50 percent of the amount for activities eligible under section 150 of this title and consistent with the State's strategic highway safety plan under section 151 of this title that are not otherwise eligible for assistance under section 402.

Subsection (b) of this section would amend section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., to add a new subsection (l) that directs the Secretary to design and implement a discretionary impaired driving grant program. In addition to other grants authorized by section 402 and subject to the provisions of subsection (l), the Secretary would be required to develop, demonstrate, and evaluate comprehensive State programs to reduce impaired driving in States with a high number of alcohol-related fatalities and a high rate of alcohol-related fatalities relative to vehicle miles traveled and population. These impaired driving grants would be funded under section 2005 of this Act.

Alcohol-impaired driving remains the most intractable behavioral problem in highway safety. In 2002, an estimated 17,970 people were killed in alcohol-related traffic crashes, a figure that represents 42 percent of all traffic fatalities for that year. The Department of Transportation's May 2002 study, "The Economic Impact of Motor Vehicle Crashes," underscores the huge economic cost associated with alcohol-related crashes. In 2000, these crashes cost the Nation $50.9 billion in economic losses. Alcohol-related crashes account for 22 percent of all crash costs.

The Department believes that to reduce impaired driving significantly a State must have a comprehensive impaired driving countermeasures program. Since the components of such a program include prevention, public education, legislation, enforcement, partnerships, treatment, program management and evaluation, the States must use the best information and best practices in a focused way to deal effectively with such diverse matters. The program established by this subsection would develop comprehensive State programs that can lead to significant gains in the Nation's effort to reduce impaired driving.

The subsection would direct the Secretary to design and implement a comprehensive State program to reduce impaired driving in States with a high number of alcohol-related fatalities and a high rate of alcohol-related fatalities relative to vehicle miles traveled and population. The Secretary would also be directed to establish a procedure for submitting grant applications under the subsection, and to select from among the applicants, the States that would participate in the program.

Grants could be used by a State only to carry out the State's program for which the grant is awarded. Funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out this subsection in a fiscal year would be subject to a deduction of not more than 10 percent for the costs of evaluating the programs and administering the provisions of the subsection.

The Federal share payable for a grant under the subsection would be: (1) 100 percent in the first and second fiscal years in which the State receives a grant; (2) 75 percent in the third and fourth fiscal years in which the State receives a grant; and (3) 50 percent in the fifth and sixth fiscal years in which the State receives a grant.

SEC. 2002. HIGHWAY SAFETY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT. [Legislation]

NHTSA's highway safety research and development program, section 403 of title 23, U.S.C., supports State highway safety behavioral programs and activities. It does this by developing and demonstrating innovative safety countermeasures, and by collecting and disseminating essential data on highway safety. The results of our section 403 research provide the scientific basis for highway safety programs that States and local communities can tailor to their own needs, ensuring that precious tax dollars are spent only on programs that are effective. The States are encouraged to use the successful programs for their ongoing safety programs and activities.

Highway safety behavioral research focuses on human factors that influence driver and pedestrian behavior and on environmental conditions affecting safety. The program addresses a wide range of safety problems through various programs, initiatives, and demonstrations, such as: impaired driving programs, drug evaluation and classification (DEC) programs, including the Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) initiative, safety belt and child safety seat programs and related enforcement mobilizations, pedestrian, bicycle, and motorcycle safety initiatives and related law enforcement strategies, enforcement and justice services, speed management, aggressive driving countermeasures, emergency medical services, fatigue and inattention countermeasures, and data collection and analysis efforts. All of these efforts have produced a variety of useful results.

Section 2005 of this bill would fund Section 403 activities.

This section would amend subsection (a) of section 403 of title 23, U.S.C., to provide, in addition to the Secretary's general authority under subsection (a), specific express authority with respect to emergency medical services, international highway safety activities, and a national motor vehicle crash causation survey. In the emergency medical services area, it is important to note that the "Public Health Security and Bioterrorism Preparedness and Response Act of 2002" (Pub. L. 107-188; June 12, 2002; Section 108(a)(1)(L)) affirmed NHTSA's role in coordinating State, local, and community-based emergency medical services.

The first provision would add a new paragraph (4) under section 403(a). In addition to the Secretary's general authority under subsection (a), this provision would provide that the Secretary may use funds appropriated to carry out section 403 to enhance coordination among Federal agencies involved with State, local, Tribal, and community-based emergency medical services. In exercising this authority, paragraph (4) provides that the Secretary may coordinate with State and local governments, the Bureau of Indian Affairs on behalf of Indian Tribes, private industry, and other interested parties; collect and exchange emergency medical services data and information; examine emergency medical services needs, best practices, and related technology; and develop emergency medical services standards and guidelines, and plans for the assessment of emergency medical services systems.

Section 2005(b)(1) of this bill would fund these emergency medical services activities.

The second provision would add a new paragraph (5) under section 403(a). In addition to the Secretary's general authority under subsection (a), this provision would provide that the Secretary may use funds appropriated to carry out section 403 to participate and cooperate in international activities to enhance highway safety. In exercising this authority, paragraph (5) provides that the Secretary may exchange safety information; conduct safety research; and examine safety needs, best practices, and new technology. This paragraph would not confer any independent authority to negotiate binding agreements with foreign nations on behalf of the United States.

Section 2005(b)(2) would fund these international cooperative traffic safety program activities.

The third provision would add a new paragraph (6) under section 403(a). In addition to the Secretary's general authority under subsection (a), this provision would provide that the Secretary may use funds appropriated to carry out section 403 to develop and conduct a nationally representative survey to collect on-scene motor vehicle crash causation data.

To substantially reduce highway fatality and injury rates, more needs to be done to find ways to prevent crashes from occurring. NHTSA's National Automotive Sampling System (NASS) collects data for the system days-or even weeks-after a crash. While acceptable for crashworthiness research, effective primary prevention demands timely, on-scene collection of detailed physical evidence of crash causation. Nearly 30 years have passed since the last on-scene motor vehicle crash causation survey was conducted (the Indiana Tri-Level Study). Accordingly, NHTSA's current crash causation database, which is so critical to understanding the complex events that cause and contribute to highway crashes, is woefully inadequate. A new on-scene data collection survey is urgently needed to obtain "fresh" data from real-time observations and interviews. Real-time data are essential to understanding crash causation and defining and developing effective countermeasure programs.

The new on-scene motor vehicle crash causation survey would allow NHTSA's crash avoidance program to be based on reliable, real-world data. As new crash avoidance technologies continue to emerge, NHTSA needs relevant data to guide the design, development and evaluation of these new technologies. FHWA and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), private industry, and public interest groups also would benefit greatly from a new on-scene data collection survey.

To have sustained value in a rapidly changing environment, the survey would be continuous in the same manner as the NASS Crashworthiness Data System (CDS). The on-scene methodologies and procedures developed for the Large Truck Crash Causation Study (LTCCS), currently being conducted by NHTSA as part of the NASS CDS, would be used in the national motor vehicle crash causation survey.

Section 2005(b)(3) would fund the national motor vehicle crash causation survey.

SEC. 2003. EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES. [Legislation]

This section would amend section 407 of title 23, U.S.C., to establish a program to improve Federal coordination and support of emergency medical services (EMS) and 9-1-1 systems, consistent with the President's focus on reinforcing the Nation's emergency preparedness and first response capacity.

For the past 20 years, Federal support for EMS has been both scarce and uncoordinated. As a result, the capacity of this critical public service has seen little growth. Since the last major Federal EMS infrastructure investment, the Emergency Services Systems Act of 1973 (Pub. L. 93-154, repealed on August 13, 1981, by Pub. L. 97-35), support for EMS has been spread among a number of agencies, including NHTSA, the Department of Health and Human Services' Health Resources and Services Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Department of Homeland Security's Director, Preparedness Division, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, and the United States Fire Administration, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services. Most of the support offered by these agencies has focused only on specific system functions, rather than on overall system capacity, and has been inconsistent and ineffectively coordinated.

In 2001, the General Accounting Office (GAO) cited in its report, "Emergency Medical Response: Reported Needs Are Wide-Ranging, With Lack of Data A Growing Concern," the need to increase coordination among Federal agencies as they address the needs of regional, State, or local emergency medical services systems. According to GAO, these needs, including personnel, training, equipment, and more emergency personnel in the field, vary between urban and rural communities.

The Department believes that Federal support for EMS and 9-1-1 systems should be enhanced and coordinated. The enactment of this section would result in comprehensive system support for EMS, 9-1-1 systems, and improved emergency response capacity nationwide.

The Department believes that the need for Federal support and coordination is especially critical with the increasing burden placed on State and local EMS systems by homeland defense and security issues. In a mass casualty event, communities rely on their EMS system to provide front line medical care for the first 12 to 24 hours, before Federal resources become available. Yet many local systems lack the skills and resources needed to detect, respond to, and manage mass casualty incidents. Without adequate preparation, local systems are likely to become quickly incapacitated, leaving the community with no EMS coverage for even routine emergencies such as motor vehicle crashes and cardiac arrests.

EMS systems across the Nation also require substantial development to realize their potential as our communities' emergency medical safety net. A number of sources of information are available to identify specific strengths and weaknesses in EMS systems. These include the Statewide EMS Assessments conducted by NHTSA in 48 States between 1988-2001, the 1996 EMS Agenda for the Future, a survey of State EMS Directors conducted in 2000 by the Office of Rural Health Policy in the Department of Health and Human Services, and a 2001 General Accounting Office Report on Emergency Medical Response.

These sources consistently indicate shortcomings in the Nation's EMS system in several critical areas, including emergency communications, trauma system development, EMS information systems, and rural EMS. EMS communications systems are a particular weak point. For example, no State has yet fully implemented wireless E9-1-1, a shortcoming that prevents emergency responders from automatically locating people who call 9-1-1 from wireless phones. Communication among emergency providers is also lacking, especially in rural areas where nearly three quarters of EMS systems lack the ability to reliably communicate among dispatchers, ambulances, and hospitals.

Trauma system development is critically needed, with 61 percent of States lacking triage protocols for transporting patients to specialty care facilities, such as trauma centers, burn centers, and pediatric centers. EMS information systems are another weakness, with over 90 percent of States lacking critical components of the comprehensive data systems needed to efficiently manage EMS resources, respond to daily emergencies, and provide adequate surveillance to detect acts of terrorism such as chemical, nuclear, or biological events. Other shortcomings identified by these studies include EMS medical direction, recruitment and retention of EMS personnel, and EMS research.

The Department of Transportation, through NHTSA, seeks to help States address these shortcomings through a formula grant and technical assistance program.

Subsection (a) of this section would direct the Secretary of Transportation and the Secretary of Homeland Security through the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, to establish a Federal Interagency Committee on Emergency Medical Services to provide intergovernmental coordination of emergency medical services. The Committee would be required to: (i) assure coordination among the Federal agencies involved with State, local, Tribal, or regional emergency medical services and 9-1-1 systems; (ii) identify State, local, Tribal, or regional emergency services and 9-1-1 system needs; (iii) recommend new or expanded programs, including grant programs, for improving State, local, Tribal, or regional emergency medical services and implementing improved EMS technologies, including wireless E9-1-1; (iv) identify ways to streamline the process through which Federal agencies support State, local, Tribal, or regional emergency medical services; (v) assist State, local, Tribal, or regional emergency medical services in setting priorities based on identified needs; and (vi) advise, consult with, and make recommendations on matters relating to the implementation of the coordinated State emergency medical services program that would be established under subsection (b) of this section.

Membership of the Interagency Committee on EMS would consist of the following officials, or their designees: NHTSA Administrator; Director, Preparedness Division, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Administrator of the Health Resources and Services Administration; Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention; Administrator of United States Fire Administration, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security; Director of the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services; Undersecretary of Defense for Personnel and Readiness, Department of Defense; Assistant Secretary for Public Health Emergency Preparedness, Department of Health and Human Services; Director, Indian Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services; Chief, Wireless Telecom Bureau of the Federal Communications Commission; and representatives of any other Federal agency identified by the Secretary of Transportation or the Secretary Homeland Security through the Under Secretary for Emergency Preparedness and Response, in consultation with the Secretary of Health and Human Services, as having a significant role in the purposes of the Interagency Committee on EMS.

NHTSA, in cooperation with the Director, Preparedness Division, Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, Department of Homeland Security, would provide administrative support to the Committee, including scheduling meetings, setting agendas, keeping minutes and records, and producing reports. The members of the Committee would select the Committee's chairperson every year, and the Committee would meet whenever the chairperson determined a meeting to be necessary. Finally, the Committee would be required to prepare an annual report to Congress on the Committee's activities, actions, and recommendations.

Subsection (b) of this section would establish a State formula grant program to support the coordination of EMS systems development, including implementation of 9-1-1 systems. The program would be administered through the EMS Offices of the States. An administrative deduction of 10 percent of the funds for the program would be used for independent evaluation and administrative operations of funded projects. A more detailed description of subsection (b) is provided below.

Subsection (b)(1) would authorize and direct the Secretary of Transportation, through the NHTSA Administrator, to cooperate with other Federal departments and agencies, and to assist State and local governments and EMS organizations, both fire-based and otherwise, private industry, and other interested parties, to ensure the development and implementation of a coordinated nationwide emergency medical services program designed to strengthen transportation safety and public health and to implement EMS communications systems including 9-1-1. The term 'State,' under the section, would mean any one of the fifty States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and the Secretary of the Interior on behalf of Indian Tribes.

Subsection (b)(2) would require each State to establish a program, approved by the Secretary, to coordinate the emergency medical services and resources deployed throughout the State, so as to ensure improved EMS communication systems including 9-1-1, utilization of established best practices for system design and operations, implementation of quality assurance programs, and incorporation of data collection and analysis programs that facilitate system development and data linkages with other systems and programs useful to emergency medical services.

Subsection (b)(3) would provide that the Secretary may not approve a State's program under this subsection unless the program--

• provides that the Governor of the State is responsible for the administration of the program through a State office of emergency medical services that has adequate powers and is suitably equipped and organized to carry out such program and coordinates such program with the highway safety office of the State; and
  
  
• authorizes political subdivisions of the State to participate in and receive funds under such program, consistent with the goal of achieving statewide coordination of emergency medical services and 9-1-1 activities.

Subsection (b)(4) would provide that the funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out subsection (b) shall be used to aid the States in coordinating emergency medical services and 9-1-1 programs. These funds would be subject to a deduction not to exceed 10 percent for the necessary costs of administering the provisions of subsection (b), and the remainder would be apportioned among the States. The apportionment of these funds would incorporate the exact formula for the apportionment of highway safety funds under section 402(c) of this chapter.

Subsection (b)(5) would provide contract authority for the program.

Subsection (b)(6) would provide that the Federal share of the cost of a project or program funded under subsection (b) would be 80 percent.

Subsection (b)(7) would identify the Secretary of the Interior as the Governor of the State, for the purposes of application of the emergency medical services program to Indian Tribes, and defines Indian Country.

Section 2005 of this Act would provide funds out of the Highway Trust Fund to carry out this section. The funds proposed each fiscal year for this section would be an important catalyst to encourage the States to ensure greater coordination among the various elements of their EMS and 9-1-1 programs. In its 2001 policy paper, "Domestic Terrorism: Issues of Preparedness," the National Association of State EMS Directors concluded: "For EMS services across the nation, funding of $583 million is needed immediately to: create the infrastructure; train personnel; obtain needed equipment; integrate with other public safety services, public health departments, and healthcare structures; and create a comprehensive EMS information system." The Department believes that the seed funds proposed by this section are necessary to accelerate the Nation's efforts to coordinate State EMS and 9-1-1 systems.

SEC. 2004. STATE TRAFFIC SAFETY INFORMATION SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS. [Legislation]

This section would amend chapter 4, Highway Safety, of title 23, U.S.C., to establish a State traffic safety information system incentive grant program under a new section 412. Section 2005 of this Act would provide funds out of the Highway Trust Fund to carry out this section.

The State highway safety data improvement grant program under section 411 of title 23, U.S.C., has afforded the States the opportunity to make needed improvements in their Traffic Safety Information Systems. Components of these traffic records systems include crash, driver licensing, vehicle registration, citation and court records related to traffic violations and convictions, emergency medical services information, and data on roadway characteristics. Despite the improvements that States have made in these areas with the help of section 411 grants, major deficiencies persist. For example, the trafficrecords data of many States are not timely, accurate, complete, uniform, integrated with other State data systems or easily accessible. Accordingly, more funding support is needed at the Federal level to promote continued improvements in State traffic safety information systems.

Improvements in State traffic safety information systems would benefit local, State, and national transportation and a number of different State and Federal transportation-related agencies, such as State Offices of Highway Safety and State Departments of Transportation, and the U. S. Department of Transportation's Bureau of Transportation Statistics, FHWA, NHTSA, and FMCSA. By improving the availability of more timely, accurate, complete, uniform, integrated and accessible traffic safety data, these State and Federal agencies would be better equipped to identify local, State, and national transportation safety problems and to evaluate their programs and countermeasures.

Subsection (a) of this section would direct the Secretary to make grants to States that adopt and implement effective programs to (1) improve the timeliness, accuracy, completeness, uniformity, integration and accessibility of the safety data of the State that is needed to identify priorities for national, State, and local highway and traffic safety programs; (2) evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to make such improvements; (3) link these State data systems, including traffic records, with other data systems within the State, such as systems that contain medical, roadway, and economic data; and (4) improve the compatibility and interoperability of the data systems of the State with national data systems and data systems of other States and enhance the ability of the Secretary to observe and analyze national trends in crash occurrences, rates, outcomes, and circumstances. The States could use the grants only to implement these programs.

In addition, subsection (a) would direct the Secretary, in consultation with States and other appropriate parties, to determine the model data elements necessary to observe and analyze State and national trends in crash occurrences, rates, outcomes, and circumstances. In order to become eligible for a grant under the section, a State must certify to the Secretary that the State has adopted and is using such model data elements.

To receive a grant in a fiscal year under the section, a State must enter into such agreements with the Secretary to ensure that the State will maintain its aggregate expenditures from all other sources for highway safety data programs at or above the average level of such expenditures in the 2 fiscal years preceding the enactment of this bill.

Finally, subsection (a) would provide that the Federal share of the cost of a State program may not exceed 80 percent.

Subsection (b) would provide for first-year grants and their amounts. To be eligible for a first-year grant in a fiscal year, a State must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Secretary that it has (1) established a highway safety data and traffic records coordinatingcommittee with a multidisciplinary membership that includes among others, managers, collectors, and users of traffic records and public health and injury control data systems; and (2) developed a multiyear highway safety data and traffic records system strategic plan that addresses existing deficiencies in the State's highway safety data and traffic records system and is approved by the highway safety data and traffic records coordinating committee and (i) specifies how existing deficiencies in the State's highway safety data and traffic records system were identified; (ii) prioritizes, based on the identified highway safety data and traffic records system deficiencies, the highway safety data and traffic records system needs and goals of the State, including but not limited to the activities under subsection (a)(1); (iii) identifies performance-based measures by which progress toward those goals will be determined; (iv) specifies how the grant funds and any other funds of the State will be used to address needs and goals identified in the multiyear plan; and (v) includes a current report on the progress in implementing the multiyear plan that documents progress toward the specified goals.

Subsection (b) would also provide that the amount of a first-year grant to a State for a fiscal year shall equal an amount determined by multiplying (1) the amount appropriated to carry out the section for such fiscal year; by (2) the ratio that the funds apportioned to the State under section 402 of this chapter for fiscal year 2003 bears to the funds apportioned to all States under section 402 for fiscal year 2003; except that no State eligible for a grant under the section would receive less than $300,000.

Subsection (c) would provide for succeeding-year grants and their amounts. A State would be eligible for a grant in a year succeeding the first fiscal year in which the State receives a grant, if the State, to the satisfaction of the Secretary (1) submits an updated multiyear plan that meets the requirements for the multiyear plan for the first-year grant; (2) certifies that its highway safety data and traffic records coordinating committee continues to operate and supports the multiyear plan; (3) specifies how the grant funds and any other funds of the State will be used to address needs and goals identified in the multiyear plan; (4) demonstrates measurable progress toward achieving the goals and objectives identified in the multiyear plan; and (5) includes a report on the progress in implementing the multiyear plan.

Subsection (c) would also provide that the amount of a succeeding-year grant to a State for a fiscal year shall equal the amount determined by multiplying (1) the amount appropriated to carry out the section for such fiscal year; by (2) the ratio that the funds apportioned to the State under section 402 for fiscal year 2003bears to the funds apportioned to all States under section 402 for fiscal year 2003; except that no State eligible for a grant would receive less than $500,000.

Subsection (d) would provide that the funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out the section in a fiscal year would be subject to a deduction not to exceed 5 percent for the necessary costs of administering the provisions of the section. Subsection (e) would provide contract authority for the program.

SEC. 2005. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS. [Legislation]

Subsection (a) of this section would authorize funds out of the Highway Trust Fund (other than the Mass Transit Account) for NHTSA's highway safety programs, as follows:

For the State and Community Highway Safety Program under section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., except for subsections (k) and (l), $162 million would be provided for fiscal year 2004, $167 million for fiscal year 2005, $172 million for fiscal year 2006, $177 million for fiscal year 2007, $183 million for fiscal year 2008, and $189 million for fiscal year 2009.

For the performance grant programs under subsection (k) of section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., $175 million would be provided for fiscal year 2004, $179 million for fiscal year 2005, $183 million for fiscal year 2006, $189 million for fiscal year 2007, $195 million for fiscal year 2008, and $201 million for fiscal year 2009.

For the impaired driving grant program under subsection (l) of section 402 of title 23, U.S.C., $50 million would be provided for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.

For the Highway Safety Research and Development program under section 403, $88.452 million would be provided for fiscal year 2004, $90 million for fiscal year 2005, $92 million for fiscal year 2006, $94 million for fiscal year 2007, $96 million for fiscal year 2008, and $99 million for fiscal year 2009.

For the emergency medical services grant program under section 407, $10 million would be provided for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.

For the State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements program under section 412, $50 million would be provided for each of fiscal years 2004 through 2009.

For the National Driver Register program under chapter 303 of title 49, United States Code, $3.6 million would be provided for fiscal year 2004, and $4 million for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009.

Subsection (b) of this section provides that, out of amounts appropriated for the Highway Safety Research and Development program under section 403, allocations are to be made of $2.226 million in each fiscal year for emergency medical services activities under paragraph (4) of section 403(a), $.20 million in each fiscal year for the international cooperation activities under paragraph (5) of section 403(a), and $10 million in each fiscal year for the national motor vehicle crash causation survey under paragraph (6) of section 403(a).

Subsection (c)(1) of this section provides that amounts made available for the highway safety research and development program under section 403 would be available for obligation in the same manner as if such funds were apportioned under chapter 1 of title 23.

Subsection (c)(2) provides that, notwithstanding section 402(d) of title 23, the funds authorized under the section for Consolidated State Highway Safety Programs (State and community highway safety grants, performance grants, and impaired driving grants) that are apportioned or allocated in a State would remain available for obligation in that State for a period of two years after the last day of the fiscal year for which the funds are authorized. Any amounts so apportioned or allocated that remain unobligated at the end of that period would lapse.

SEC. 2006. REPEAL OF OBSOLETE PROVISIONS OF TITLE 23. [Legislation]

This section repeals two expired authorities, section 406 (school bus driver training) and section 408 (alcohol traffic safety programs) of title 23, U.S.C. Both programs were originally enacted many years ago, funded many years ago, and the funds for the programs have been completely expended. NHTSA has never requested new authorizations for the programs, nor has Congress provided any.

Congress enacted section 406 (School bus driver training) in 1975, and provided an authorization of $7.5 million for Fiscal Year (FY) 1976 to carry it out (out of the funds authorized for the section 402 highway safety program for that fiscal year). In 1976, Congress authorized $7 million for section 406 (again out of the funds authorized for the section 402 program) for each of FYs 1977 and 1978. That was the last authorization for section 406, and the funds authorized have been exhausted.

Congress enacted section 408 (alcohol traffic safety programs), NHTSA's first alcohol incentive grant program, in 1982, and provided authorizations for each of FYs 1982-1984 to carry it out. That was the last time section 408 was authorized, and the funds authorized have been exhausted. In 1988, Congress effectively replaced the section 408 program with the section 410 (drunk driving prevention programs) incentive grant program.