Page images
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]
[ocr errors]


Program Level Obligations
State and Community Grants..... -0- $72,100 -0 $66,620
Administration of Grant
-0 2,900 -0 3,380

+480 Total Obligations...

50 -O- $75,000

$70,000 -$5,000 y Reflects the reallocation of funding to FHWA to cover highway-oriented standards.

[ocr errors]

Funding Requirements
Federal Funds ....
Highway Trust Fund

Total Requirements,
Liquidation of Contract

Appropriation to Liquidate Contract Authority
-0- $51,000 -0 $49,000

- $2,000



[blocks in formation]


The programs for which funds are requested under this Appropriation heading are
authorized under the Highway Safety Act of 1966 and subsequent Amendment. This
legislation directed the Secretary of Transportation to encourage and assist each
of the States to develop and implement highway safety programs to reduce traffic
accidents and the deaths, injuries, and property damage relating therefrom.
Programs developed pursuant to the enabling legislation are constructed under
broad Federal standards but designed to meet special State and local needs and
conditions. Encompassed programs are implemented by the States and communities,
os implied in the Appropriation title, with the Federal Government sharing the
costs on a matching fund basis with these political entities.
From inception of the program, a total of 16 highway safety standards as shown
below have been issued to provide the states with a basis to develop comprehensive

safety programs.

I Periodic Motor Vehicle

! Motor Vehicle Registration
O Motorcycle Safety
O Driver Education
• Codes and Laws
I Traffic Courts

Driver Licensing
Alcohol in Relation to

Highway Safety

I Traffic Records
• Emergency Medical Services

Police Traffic Services
Wreckage Control and Cleanup
Pedestrian Safety
Identification & Surveillance of

Accident Locations
• Traffic Control Devices
Highway Design, Construction &


In March 1970, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (then the National Highway Safety Bureau) was separated from the Federal Highway Administration and established as a separate organizational entity in the Department of Transportation. Up to that time NHTSA had the responsibility for administration of all 16 safety standards. With the separation, administration of the (1) Design, Construction and Maintenance, (2) Traffic Control Devices, and (3) Identification and Surveillance of Accident Locations standards was reassigned to FHWA. along with partial responsibility for administration of the Pedestrian Safety Standard. This division of responsibility has become known colloquially as the 12 1/2 and 3 1/2 standard split. In the Highway Safety Act of 1970, separate funding authorizations were established for standards to be administered by NHTSA and FHWA for fiscal years 1972 and 1973 as follows:

[blocks in formation]

The 1970 Act further stated that two-thirds of required funding would be provided
by the Highway Trust Fund with the remaining one-third from Federal funds. In
addition, previous authorizations for fiscal years 1970 and 1971, made under the
Highway Safety Act of 1968, were rescinded in the 1970 Act.
Although authorizations for the highway safety program are separately stated in the
enabling Act, the program will be jointly administered by NHTSA and FHWA in order
to continue the maximum degree of flexibility afforded to the States in carrying
out these programs. This is consistent with the Presidential objective of
obtaining maximum State participation in the direction of Federal resources to obtain
stated program objectives. It will also preserve the concept of the annual Highway
Safety Work Program, wherein each State can outline in specific terms the program
plans, specifications, cost and goals to be achieved throughout the 16 standard area
spectrum without regard to the imposition of 12 1/2 and 3 1/2 ratios on a State by
State basis, as long as the overall program is maintained within governing totals.
In line with this philosophy, the NHTSA 1972 budget proposal calls for an
obligation level of $70 million pursuant to an authorized maximum funding level of
$100 million contained in the above-mentioned Highway Safety Act of 1970. FHWA'S
budget proposal calls for an obligation level of $10 million pursuant to their
authorization of $30 million. As stated in the following excerpt from the appendix
to the Presidential budget document, however, this constitutes a tentative
subdivision of a total program level of $80 million,

"A tentative distribution for purposes of the budget
schedule indicates that this total would be divided
by $10 million for the FHWA and $70 million for the
NHTSA but this is a tentative estimate for the sub-
division of total obligations. Annual program
plans, as submitted by the States and approved by
the two agencies, will determine the actual distri-
bution of obligations between the two authorizations.
In no event will obligations exceed either of the
separate authorizations."

The ensuing justifications are furnished in support of the total $70 million obligation level, of which one-third of the required funding will be supplied from this appropriation and two-thirds will be secured from the Highway Trust Fund. Funds obtained from the Highway Trust Funds will be transferred to this appropriation to permit administration of the program from one appropriation. This is briefly illustrated as follows:

[ocr errors]

State and community grants...

$66.6 Administration of grant program.

Total program...

Deduct financing supplied from the
Highway Trust Fund.....

Financing to be derived from this appropriation... $23.3

Appropriation to Liquidate Contract Authority An appropriation of $57.0 million is requested in FY 1972 to liquidate State and Community Highway Safety Program obligations incurred under contract authority contained in enabling legislation. The major portion of the FY 1972 appropriation request will be utilized to make payment against obligations incurred prior to AY 1972. A smaller amount is required to meet current FY 1972 obligations since there is a delay in timing between program development and payment. The appropriation request is based on a review of cash disbursement trends taking into account unpaid obligations carried forward from prior years into FY 1972. Although the budget reflects an obligated cash balance of $11.7 million at the end of FY 1972, this is considered to be a reasonable reserve required to cope with any acceleration of disbursements which occur as the State and Community Highway Safety Program is converted from an individual project to an annual work plan bas is in FY 1972. The following table reflects the projected financial status of this appropriation for FY 1972:

Estimated unexpended appropriation, July 1, 1971..
Add 1972 appropriation..

Federal funds....

Highway Trust Fund.
Deduct 1972 outlays.....

Unexpended appropriation, July 1, 1972.



Justification of

Fiscal Year 1972 Appropriation
for the State and Community Highway Safety Programs

The Highway Safety Act of 1966 created a new and vital partnership between State, local, and Federal governments. Its passage recognized two facts:

(1) The ever mounting slaughter on the nations highways must be

stopped, and

(2) The uncoordinated safety activities of the various States

would not significantly reduce traffic accidents and fatalities. The framers of the Act, therefore, required that each State have a comprehensive highway safety program with all the various activities relating to highway safety planned and carried out as a total coordinated effort. Departmental objectives are directed toward these points. From the outset, it has been the goal of the Administration to upgrade, expand and coordinate nighway safety ** effort at the national, State and community level through technical assistance, use of Federal-aid funds, and research.

Initial program coordination was inaugurated when several States prepared and submitted comprehensive highway safety programs which were by law subject to approval action on the part of the Secretary. Although all State comprehensive highway safety program submissions were approved on or before December 31, 1969, many of the State plans and efforts fell short of providing the overall, coordinated plan envisioned under the Act. Fiscal Year 1972 will be the first year of transition by all States to a comprehensive, coordinated system.

For Fiscal Year 1972, all States will update their comprehensive highway safety
program submissions and must have Annual Work Programs covering all their highway
safety activities and showing the disposition of State, local and Federal Funds.
A few States, as a result of extensive training, submitted Annual Work Programs
for Fiscal Year 1971. Training and orientation seminars were held by the Admin-
istration for over 300 State and Federal officials in early 1970. State officials
recognized the need for comprehensive planning and enthusiastically endorsed the
Annual Work Program concept.

The Annual Work Program will result in the review of all safety activities of a
State at one time in one document. This document will implement one year's
activities of a State's long-range comprehensive program which will be updated
by March 1, 1972. The Governor will be able to identify coordination points and
information requirements of related activities, allocate resources consistent with
the scope and importance of program units, and assure that levels of activity are
consistent with State and national priorities.
In addition, review of Annual Work plans and comprehensive State Programs will
inevitably result in a priority listing, as a result of States' requirements for
Section 402 funds by standard area. While this data will be extremely useful to
the Administration in long range planning, Administration leadership will be
exerted to persuade States to revise their priorities in light of Administration
knowledge of program effectiveness and national priorities, such as the Alcohol
Countermeasures Program.
The specific program structure that the States are developing for Fiscal Year 1972
is being geared to the particular and unique needs of each state and it is being
designed to assist and improve State planning, programming, and budgeting processes
in dealing with the highway safety problem.

[ocr errors]

In preparing its 1972 programs, the Administration is focusing on large program
elements with broad objectives. This concept recognizes that highway safety is
the product of a system which interrelates the roadway, the vehicle, and the driver,
the triad of our national highway-transportation make-up. The highway safety
program is the mechanism for managing this system.

Our budget for Fiscal Year 1972 is planned in four large program elements. These
four program elements correspond to and are adapted from the regulation and control
categories used by the States to achieve highway traffic safety. They embrace the
standards promulgated by the Secretary. These four elements with a listing of
standards which have primary thrust in that element are as follows:
(1) Entry - This category covers all activities relative to the

education, qualification, and testing and licensing of drivers,
including pedestrians where appropriate, as well as those
pertaining to vehicle registration and inspection. The promui -
gation of motor vehicle laws and regulations also falls into this
category. The objective of this category is to make sure that
the vehicles are safe, and the persons licensed to drive on the
highways of a State meet three criteria -- ability, knowledge
and attitude.

Standards with primary thrust in this entry category are:

Periodic motor vehicle inspection
Motor vehicle registration
Motorcycle safety
Driver education
Driver licensing
Codes and laws
Pedestrian safety

(2) Control - This category covers the operational elements of

the highway transportation system. It relates to safety
activities therein, specifically the driver, the pedestrian,
and to the vehicle and its load. The objective of this grouping
is to assure proper management and supervision of the highway
user, and the direction and control of traffic.

[ocr errors]

Standards with primary thrust in this entry category are:

Alcohol in relation to highway safety

Police traffic services
(3) Post Control and Remedial - This category relates to failures

in the system in the form of violations and crashes. One
objective of this category is to correct and improve improper
driver and pedestrian behavior. The adjudicatory and
court-related functions, driver license improvement programs
and emergency medical services also comprise this phase.
More than any other category, this category will reveal
possible gaps in the program when the States analyze their
accident and failure problems in preparing their Annual
Work Programs.
Standards with primary thrust in this entry category are:

Emergency medical services
Traffic courts

Debris and hazard control and cleanup
(4) Program Administration and coordination - All activities of

the State Comprehensive Highway Safety Program, including

[ocr errors][ocr errors]
« PreviousContinue »