Good morning, I am Dan Flowers, Director of the Arkansas Department of Transportation and President of AASHTO, and I'd like to share some words of wisdom with you. "We all leave the same way. We all come the same way. It's what we do in between that matters."

          Today we have to put our minds to work about something that matters, and matters a great deal - developing a consensus on the future of our national highway research program.

          First we have to come together as partners to consider how we can coordinate all our efforts to achieve a truly national research program.

          Second we have to identify the critical research that needs to be done at the national level but which hasn't been funded over the next five years. And if it's truly essential, we have to find a strategy to do it.

          Collectively the people in this room represent years of experience in highway research, maybe even centuries. We've dealt with the NCHRP, with SHRP, with ITS, and many other efforts.

          What is new is the vision established in TEA-21 of the way we are to conduct our national research. TEA-21 provided the largest highway; and transit programs in our history. It also provided over $450 million in funding for highway research. But TEA-21 also decentralized national research - reducing both the funding and flexibility of our federal partners at the FHWA and increasing the funding and the responsibilities of the states and of academia. This devolution of research is both a risk and a challenge. The risk is that our approach w be fragmented, duplicative, and lacking coherence. The challenge is finding a way to coordinate and collaborate to build a program that gets the best value for this sizable investment.

         So who is at the table as we begin this building process? Certainly the feds are still here, but in a different and redirected capacity. They have identified the categories of research on which we should focus, and are in the process of conducting broad forums to gather input. But they cannot bring as much to the table as they once did.

          Under TEA-21 FHWA's research authorization declined by $65.5 million from $394 million to only $329 million. And in addition, Congress directed to a large extent where more than half of that funding was to be spent. But the bigger part of the picture is that a large portion of FHWA's research was funded under its general operating expenses. With that now reduced from almost four percent takedown to only one and a half percent, that discretionary funding no longer exists.

          Also at our table are the people I represent the state departments of transportation. TEA-21 made a lot of changes for us as well. When funding went up for highways and transit, it also increased the total amount of State Planning and Research (SP&R) funds provided to the states, by more than 50 percent. ISTEA and TEA-21 require that 25 percent of those funds be used only for research, and so the national total for research spending from SP&R went up to some $125 million. State's voluntarily pool 5.5 percent of those funds to support of national research under the National Cooperative Highway Research Program. In FY 1999, this amounts to $27 million.

          So the states bring a larger pot to the table. At the same time, though, they are now shouldering some funding requirements previously born by the feds. Last fall it became apparent that the FHWA's funding shortfall put into jeopardy two critical long-term research efforts in the Long Term Pavement Performance testing and the SHRP Superpave program. Learning that both were in danger of shutting down, the AASHTO Board of Directors approved an emergency allocation of unobligated NCHRP funds in October 1998. States ponied up $10.3 million in FY 1998 to support the continuation of the LTPP program and Superpave research. For FY 2000 a total of $7.1 million was promised. How these programs will be sustained beyond this year remains to be determined.

          State funding of these programs did not come without cost to our other NCHRP research efforts. When the AASHTO Board of Directors agreed that SHRP programs be given our top research priority, other efforts took a back seat. In the FY 2000 NCHRP program which is now being balloted by the states, only 45 new research projects were approved out of 183 requested. Clearly new research initiatives are being limited. And that illustrates my second point, we have to identify the critical national research needs that are not being met, and find a way to do so. If our combined federal, state, university and industry resources are not equal to the need, then we must make that case with the Congress.

          Let me share with you some other observations based on the result of the recent NCHRP deliberations.

          Of the 90 new projects proposed by member departments for NCHRP funding, only five were selected. Of the 37 new projects proposed by AASHTO Committees, less than half, 15 were selected. Of the 28 new projects proposed by the FHWA only 2 were selected. But of the 28 new projects proposed by SHRP, 23 were selected.

          Of a total $21.55 million program, one third went to continue 18 on-going projects, one third went to SHRP, and the remaining one-third was split between 22 projects requested by AASHTO committees, AASHTO members and FHWA.

          That tells us several important things. Number one, is that while states are contributing 5.5 percent of their federal SP&R funding to this program, they are not achieving much success in the research projects they have submitted for approval.

          Another observation is that the Standing Committee on Research did not place a high priority on the majority of the research projects submitted by the FHWA. Of $13 million requested, only $450,000 was approved. Which is another reason that forums such as this are so important to identify research priorities.

          The point I want to emphasize is that this effort has got to identify a truly national program. States are important partners, because the states have a stake both in the investment of funds and in the benefits of the research. They are willing to shoulder the increased responsibility assigned to them by Congress for carrying out national research, but they want to be assured that the program being pursued is built on a strong national consensus, with broad and solid support.

         Turning to another partner that prospered under TEA-2 1, we see that the research being carried out at University Transportation Research Centers and other institutions will play a key role in our future. With designated funds under the FHWA and earmarking, university centered research under this bill totaled $22.6 million in FY 1999.

          That presents a tremendous benefit to our academic institutions to allow them to foster intellectual growth and achievement so important to our future. But it also presents a challenge in coordinating a national research effort. If you look at the language in the bill, while it specifies who is to do it, it does not provide much detail in the how and the what. There is much to be decided, and those decisions must relate to the needs of the research users.

          That is why AASHTO is calling for a national workshop this October - to bring together all the universities involved with us here today. We want to focus on how these academic research efforts can best serve the needs of the public, the states and of the transportation community. That must be approached in a comprehensive, cooperative and collaborative manner, and with the full realization that our success now will determine our success in persuading Congress of the importance of such continued research in the next reauthorization cycle.

          Let me not leave out our other partners in the transportation industry with whom we have worked with great success on many efforts, and on whom we rely to put in place many of our research products. They too have a critical stake in this effort, and they bring both resources, experience and perspective to this forum.

          So we know the players. We know the challenges - first, coordinating this new research initiative in a way that maximizes the value of every dollar spent; and second, identifying the critical research needs that are not being addressed, and finding a strategy to meet them. We at AASHTO look forward to working with you today and in the months to come. And now it's time to roll up our sleeves and get to it. Thank you.