	Introduction

Economic growth and expanded global trade have led to substantial increases in goods movement over the past few decades. The growth in freight transportation demand, along with growing passenger demand, has caused congestion in parts of the transportation system, making freight movements slower and less reliable. Because the condition and performance of freight infrastructure play a considerable role in the efficiency of the freight system, federal support of freight infrastructure investment is likely to be of significant congressional concern in the reauthorization of the surface transportation program. The program is currently authorized by the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94 ), which is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2020. The U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) forecasts that domestic freight tonnage will increase by an average of about 1.4% per year from 2015 to 2045. Core surface transportation program funds are distributed to states by formula, but freight transportation is often interstate in nature. Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) Act

The successor to SAFETEA, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21 st Century Act (MAP-21; P.L. The Secretary of Transportation could designate up to an additional 3,000 centerline miles of existing or planned roads as part of the PFN based on their future importance to freight movement. The FAST Act also directed a portion of federal funds toward highway segments and other projects deemed most critical to freight movement. It did this by creating a new discretionary grant program and a new formula program for distributing federal funds to states. The FAST Act created a new Surface Transportation Infrastructure Finance Bureau to consolidate some of the support functions for several of these programs. Key questions include whether there should be a dedicated revenue stream for freight-related purposes and whether additional federal funding should be dedicated to freight projects selected by DOT rather than distributed by formula for spending at the discretion of the states. Goods Movement Charges

One idea that has come before Congress is the creation of a new dedicated revenue stream for freight infrastructure, funded not by the motor fuels taxes that fund most federal surface transportation spending, but by a charge on goods movement. Tolls could provide a source of funding for freight-related projects. Many of the trucks delayed may be simply passing through the region rather than serving local shippers. A trucking industry study estimates that 86% of the total costs of congestion for trucks are concentrated on 17% of Interstate Highway mileage. At the same time, many Interstate Highway segments are projected to have only small increases in truck traffic through 2045. The formula used to distribute most federal surface transportation funds to the states, including formula grants under the National Highway Freight Program, does not incorporate anticipated increases in truck traffic volume, meaning that the states expected to face the largest increases in truck traffic are not entitled to greater federal funding to address capacity constraints. Autonomous Vehicles

Autonomous vehicle technology has potential applications in the freight sector. All the trucks in a platoon have drivers, but only the driver of the lead truck is in full control of the vehicles. There is no federal program dedicated solely to research and development of freight-specific technology.
Economic growth and expanded global trade have led to substantial increases in goods movement over the past few decades. The growth in freight transportation demand, along with growing passenger demand, has caused congestion in many parts of the transportation system, making freight movements slower and less reliable. Because the condition and performance of freight infrastructure play a considerable role in the efficiency of the freight system, federal support of freight infrastructure investment is likely to be of significant congressional concern in the reauthorization of the surface transportation program. The program is currently authorized by the Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act; P.L. 114-94), which is scheduled to expire on September 30, 2020.
Until recently, the federal surface transportation program did not pay specific attention to freight movement. However, the two most recent surface transportation acts, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21; P.L. 112-141), approved in 2012, and the FAST Act, passed in 2015, encouraged federal and state planning for freight transportation from a multimodal perspective. The FAST Act also directed a portion of federal funds toward highway segments and other projects deemed most critical to freight movement. It did this by creating two new programs: a discretionary grant program administered by the Secretary of Transportation and a formula program for distributing federal funds to states.
Trucks continue to move the bulk of freight in the United States. Freight tonnage is projected to increase by an average of 1.4% per year through 2045, according to the Department of Transportation (DOT), and trucks are projected to carry the largest share of the additional freight traffic. Much of the growth in truck traffic has occurred in urban areas, and this trend is expected to continue. Consequently, most truck congestion occurs in urban areas, and comparatively few highway miles are responsible for a disproportionately large share of congestion costs. Highway infrastructure decisions are mainly made by the states, but federal fuel tax revenue is an important source of funds for the projects states pursue. With fuel taxes no longer able to fully cover the cost of existing highway infrastructure programs, Congress has considered strategies to raise new revenue and to make more effective use of federal dollars to facilitate the movement of freight. The trucking industry has favored raising additional revenue by increasing fuel taxes and has generally opposed greater use of highway tolls out of concern that these may disproportionately affect truckers. DOT studies have shown that the structure of motor fuel taxes provides a subsidy to heavily loaded trucks at the expense of passenger vehicles.
One significant question is whether additional funding for freight-related infrastructure should be distributed to the states by formula or on a discretionary basis. Federal projections indicate that a relatively small number of Interstate Highway segments and interchanges are likely to face large increases in truck traffic by 2045. However, individual states may have limited incentives to use their federal formula funds to alleviate increasing congestion in those locations, as many of the trucks affected may be passing through rather than serving local businesses. Discretionary grants may be more effective in providing large amounts of federal funding for very costly freight-related projects, particularly those requiring interstate cooperation, but could also lead to fewer projects receiving federal funds.
Besides appropriating funds for freight infrastructure, Congress has created programs to support research and development of new transportation technologies. Autonomous and connected vehicle technologies have potential applications in the freight sector, but many federal regulations are written assuming that a single person is in full control of a vehicle at all times. Congress has considered, but not advanced, proposals to update such regulations. Industry is eager to explore the cost-saving potential of new technology, so it will likely remain an issue for Congress.