This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-02-438R 
entitled 'Federal Funding for Selected Surveillance Technologies' 
which was released on March 14, 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 text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of 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 the contents or accessibility 
features of this document to Webmaster@gao.gov. 

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately. 

GAO-02-529R: 

United States General Accounting Office: 
Washington, DC 20548: 

March 14, 2002: 

The Honorable Dick Armey: 
Majority Leader: 
House of Representatives: 

Subject: Federal Funding for Selected Surveillance Technologies: 

Dear Mr. Armey: 

In recent years, law enforcement officials have relied increasingly on 
new technologies to aid them in accomplishing their enforcement 
responsibilities. Although the use of some of these technologies has 
raised concerns about their effect on individuals' privacy, the 
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, on the World Trade Center and 
the Pentagon have prompted calls for increased use of surveillance 
technologies to combat terrorism and other crimes that threaten the 
security of our nation. This letter responds to your July 2001 request 
that we gather information on the federal government's role in funding 
the research and deployment of three surveillance technologies and in 
promoting those technologies. The three technologies about which we 
gathered information (as of June 30, 2001) are facial recognition, red 
light cameras, and photo radar devices. 

Background: 

Facial recognition is a developing technology, based on biometrics, 
[Footnote 1] that can be used for identification purposes. In facial 
recognition, a facial geometry biometric is created by conversion of 
an image of a face into digital code. A computer can then compare the 
converted photograph with information in an established database. For 
example, for law enforcement purposes, a database can be created from 
police mug shots of convicted criminals such as sex offenders or 
shoplifters, from photographs of missing children, or from 
intelligence photographs of suspected terrorists. Facial recognition 
can also be used for other purposes, such as to control access to 
restricted areas or to prevent identity fraud. Other forms of 
biometric technologies include retinal scanning, fingerprint imaging, 
and signature or voice recognition. 

Red light cameras are devices designed to help enforce traffic laws by 
automatically photographing vehicles that enter intersections after 
the traffic signal has turned red. 

A red light camera system typically is connected to the traffic signal 
and to sensors placed in the pavement at the crosswalk or stop line. 
The system continuously monitors the traffic signal and is triggered 
when any vehicle passes over the sensors at a speed higher than a 
preset minimum and within a specified time after the signal has turned 
red. 

Photo radar devices, like red light cameras, are tools used to help 
enforce traffic laws. These devices consist of cameras attached to 
sensor units and placed along highways or streets to photograph 
vehicles exceeding the specified speed. 

Scope and Methodology: 

We found no central source that identifies the federal departments and 
agencies employing these technologies. To identify such agencies, we 
searched and reviewed pertinent articles and technology studies and 
contacted officials at selected federal departments and agencies. We 
also searched publicly available customer information at selected 
technology companies' Internet Web sites to identify their federal 
customers. We identified 12 departments and independent agencies that 
may have been involved in one or more of the selected technologies. 
The enclosure lists the departments and agencies that we contacted. 

To learn the federal departments' and agencies' roles in funding and 
promoting these technologies, we developed a data collection 
instrument, which we circulated in August 2001 to officials at the 
departments and agencies that we had identified. The instrument was 
designed to determine whether the departments and agencies that we 
contacted were involved in any of these technologies and, if so, to 
obtain data on funds that they have obligated for research and 
development, deployment, and promotion[Footnote 2] of the technologies 
for each fiscal year from 1997 to June 30 of fiscal year 2001 and 
cumulatively for fiscal years prior to 1997. The data collection 
instrument was also designed to determine how departments or agencies 
had promoted the technologies and whether they had awarded any grants 
or contracts for deployment of the technologies in public places, such 
as parks or streets. 

Owing to the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, several agencies 
were not able to complete our data collection instrument within the 
timeframe that we had initially specified to meet the needs of your 
office. As a result, and with the approval of your office, we extended 
the completion date to January 4, 2002. Within the 12 departments and 
independent agencies that we contacted, 35 entities completed our 
survey instrument. Another 8 entities did not complete the instrument 
but informed us that they were not involved with the technologies in 
question. The Central Intelligence Agency declined to respond to our 
survey. The Department of Commerce indicated that it intended to 
respond to our survey, but it did not do so by the time we completed 
our review. 

We did not verify the information that the departments and agencies 
provided. Moreover, because some agencies had issued grants to state 
and local governments, they said that they could not determine whether 
or to what extent the grantees had spent the amounts reported on these 
technologies. 

We performed our work between July 2001 and January 2002. 

Results: 

Of the 35 federal entities that completed our survey, 17 responded 
that they had conducted research and development or testing of one or 
more of the three technologies. They reported obligating nearly $51 
million as of June 30, 2001, on facial recognition, red light cameras, 
and photo radar devices, with the largest amount reported for facial 
recognition. All of the 17 respondents reported that they had 
obligated funds for research and development, none reported using 
funds for deployment, and two reported promoting the technologies but 
did not report having obligated any funds. Following the terrorist 
attacks on September 11, 2001, federal interest in biometrics 
technology, especially facial recognition technology as a security 
measure, appears to have increased. Although we asked for data through 
June 30, 2001, several agencies voluntarily reported anecdotal 
information on anticipated future obligations for facial recognition 
technology. For example, the Department of State's Bureau of 
Intelligence and Research reported that although it had not obligated 
any funds for the deployment of facial recognition technology prior to 
June 30, 2001, it planned to work with the Bureau of Consular Affairs 
to integrate facial recognition technology into its counterterrorism 
database in fiscal year 2002. In addition, several departments 
responding to our survey indicated that they were considering 
biometric technologies as part of their overall security strategy. 

Facial recognition technology. Four departments—the Department of 
State (State), the Department of Justice (Justice), the Department of 
Energy (Energy), and the Department of Defense (Defense)—reported a 
research and development role for facial recognition technology. Two 
Defense agencies reported promoting the technology but did not report 
having obligated any funds for that purpose. These agencies are the 
National Security Agency, which sponsored the Biometrics Consortium 
to, among other things, promote and provide a forum for information 
exchange on the science and performance of biometrics, and the 
Biometrics Management Office, which promoted the technology for 
verifying the identity of persons seeking access to facilities and 
information systems within Defense. 

Among the 14 agencies and bureaus within the 4 departments involved in 
facial recognition research and development efforts, the technology 
was being developed primarily for law enforcement, public safety, or 
security (e.g., access to sensitive facilities or information) 
purposes. Other purposes for developing this technology include 
national defense, the combating of terrorism, and national security. 
All responding Justice units reported developing the technology for 
law enforcement purposes. In addition, some Justice units indicated 
that the technology was being developed for public safety, security, 
corrections, and national security. State reported considering the 
technology as an aid in security and in the detection of fraudulent 
visa applications. Energy reported developing the technology for 
security and national security purposes. As table 1 shows, these 
departments reported obligating approximately $47 million dollars on 
the research and development of facial recognition technology through 
June 2001. Nearly 98 percent of this total was obligated by Justice 
and Defense—about $21.3 million and $24.7 million, respectively. 

The first reported obligations for facial recognition technology were 
by Defense, which began research and development in fiscal year 1987. 
Justice reported first funding facial recognition technology efforts 
in 1994 as part of a research and development project at the El Paso 
Sector of the U.S. Border Patrol in an effort to identify suspect 
criminal aliens. 

Table 1: Amounts Obligated by Federal Departments for Facial 
Recognition Technology, by Fiscal Year: 

Department/Agency: State; 
Pre-1997: 0; 
1997: 0; 
1998: 0; 
1999: $12,000; 
2000: $450,000; 
2001 (through June 30): $100,000; 
Total: $562,000. 

Department/Agency: Energy; 
Pre-1997: $125,000; 
1997: 0; 
1998: 0; 
1999: $400,000; 
2000: 0; 
2001 (through June 30): 0; 
Total: $525,000. 

Department/Agency: Justice; 
Pre-1997: $3,668,000; 
1997: $4,843,000; 
1998: $5,500,000; 
1999: $787,000; 
2000: $784,000; 
2001 (through June 30): $5,709,000; 
Total: $21,291,000. 

Department/Agency: Defense; 
Pre-1997: $5,730,000; 
1997: $744,000; 
1998: $3,171,000; 
1999: $2,872,000; 
2000: $7,330,000; 
2001 (through June 30): $4,843,000; 
Total: $24,690,000. 

Department/Agency: Total; 
Pre-1997: $9,523,000; 
1997: $5,587,000; 
1998: $8,671,000; 
1999: $4,071,000; 
2000: $8,564v
2001 (through June 30): $10,652,000; 
Total: $47,068,000. 

Source: Departments' responses to GAO's survey. 

[End of table] 

Red light cameras. Of the departments and agencies responding to the 
survey, only the Department of Transportation (Transportation) 
reported obligating funds for research and development of red light 
camera technology. Within Transportation, only the Federal Highway 
Administration reported having obligated funds for research and 
development of the technology, beginning in fiscal year 1993.[Footnote 
3] As shown in table 2, Transportation reported obligating a total of 
$556,000, beginning in 1997, for research and development of red light 
camera technology for public safety and traffic engineering purposes. 

Table 2: Amounts Obligated by the Department of Transportation for Red 
Light Camera Technology, by Fiscal Year: 

Department: Transportation; 
Pre-1997: 0; 
1997: $110,000; 
1998: $238,000; 
1999: $135,000; 
2000: $3,000; 
2001 (through June 30): $70,000; 
Total: $556,000;. 

Source: Transportation's response to GAO's survey. 

[End of table] 

Photo radar devices. Transportation (Federal Highway Administration 
and National Highway Traffic Safety Administration) and Defense 
(Office of Naval Research) were the only departments to report having 
obligated funds for the research and development of photo radar 
devices. The Department of Interior's National Park Service reported 
testing the technology as a demonstration project but stated that 
Transportation funded the test. As shown in table 3, the departments 
reported that they had obligated about $3.1 million for research and 
development of photo radar devices as of June 30, 2001. 

The departments reported that they used this technology for public 
safety, law enforcement, and military radars. According to the survey 
responses, Transportation's National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration first obligated funds for photo radar devices in fiscal 
year 1978, although it has not obligated funds since 1999. Defense 
first obligated funds in 1974 but has not obligated any since before 
1997. 

Table 3: Amounts Obligated by the Departments of Transportation and 
Defense for Photo Radar Devices, by Fiscal Year: 

Department: Transportation; 
Pre-1997: $1,878,000; 
1997: $50,000; 
1998: $242,000; 
1999: $199,000; 
2000: 0; 
2001 (through June 30): 0; 
Total: $2,369,000. 

Department: Defense; 
Pre-1997: $750,000; 
1997: 0; 
1998: 0; 
1999: 0; 
2000: 0; 
2001 (through June 30): 0; 
Total: $750,000. 

Department: Total; 
Pre-1997: $2,628,000; 
1997: $50,000; 
1998: $242,000; 
1999: $199,000; 
2000: 0; 
2001 (through June 30): 0; 
Total: $3,119,000. 

Source: Departments' responses to GAO's survey. 

[End of table] 

Agency Comments: 

Because we are reporting information provided to us by the departments 
and agencies that completed our data collection instrument, we 
provided draft copies of the information contained herein to the 
respondents for their review and verification of the facts as 
presented. Their comments have been incorporated in this letter as 
appropriate. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly release the contents 
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this letter until 30 days 
from the issue date. At that time we will make the letter available to 
the departments and agencies that responded to our data collection 
instrument. This letter will also be made available on GAO's home page 
at [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]. 

If you should have any questions about this letter, please call Daniel 
C. Harris or me at (202) 512-8777. Key contributors to this report 
were Robert P. Glick and Carolyn Ikeda. 

Sincerely yours, 

Signed by: 

Richard Stana: 
Director, Justice Issues: 

[End of section] 

Enclosure: 

Departments and Agencies That GAO Contacted and Their Involvement with 
the Subject Technologies through June 30, 2001: 
				
Department or agency: Commerce[A]; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): [Empty]; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): [Empty]; 
Photo radar (PR): [Empty]; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Technical support working group; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1998. 

Department or agency: Defense: Biometrics Management Office; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D and Promotion; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1999. 

Department or agency: Defense: Defense Advanced Research Projects 
Agency; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 2000. 

Department or agency: Defense: Naval Surface Warfare Center; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1993. 

Department or agency: Defense: National Security Agency; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D and Promotion; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1987. 

Department or agency: Defense: Office of Naval Research; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): Yes; 
Program: R&D (FRT); R&D (PR); 
Fiscal year funding began: 1996; 1974. 

Department or agency: Defense: Naval Criminal Investigative Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Acquisition, Logistics, & Technology 
(Army); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Defense Criminal Investigative Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Undersecretary of Defense,[B] 
Comptroller (Chief Financial Officer); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Deputy Chief of Staff for Operations 
and Plans,[B] Security Force Protection, and Law Enforcement Division 
(Army); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Criminal Investigation Command[B] 
(Technical Services) (Army); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Office of the Asst. Secretary, 
Acquisition[B] (SAF/AQA) (Air Force); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Office of Special Investigations[B] 
(Technical Services) (Air Force); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Defense: Advanced Technology and Planning Force 
Protection,[B] C2 SPO (Air Force); 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Energy: Special Technologies Program, Office of 
Intelligence; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1996. 

Department or agency: Energy: Safeguards and Security; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1999. 

Department or agency: Energy: Oak Ridge National Laboratory; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Energy: Policy and Internal Controls Management; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Interior: National Park Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): Yes; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: Funded by NHTSA. 

Department or agency: Justice: National Institute of Justice, Office 
of Science and Technology; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1995. 

Department or agency: Justice: Federal Bureau of Investigation; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 2000. 

Department or agency: Justice: Community Oriented Policing; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1996. 

Department or agency: Justice: Immigration & Naturalization Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1994. 

Department or agency: Justice: U.S. Marshals Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Justice: Drug Enforcement Administration; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Justice: Justice Management Division; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Justice: Bureau of Prisons; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: State: Bureau of Consular Affairs; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 2000. 

Department or agency: State: Bureau of Diplomatic Security; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): Yes; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1999. 

Department or agency: State: Bureau of Intelligence and Research; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: State: Bureau of Administration; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Transportation: Federal Highway Administration, 
Office of Safety Design; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): Yes; 
Photo radar (PR): Yes; 
Program: R&D (RLC); R&D (PR); 
Fiscal year funding began: 1993; 1997. 

Department or agency: Transportation: Federal Highway Administration, 
Operations Core Business Unit; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Transportation: National Highway Traffic Safety 
Administration, Traffic Safety Program; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): Yes; 
Program: R&D; 
Fiscal year funding began: 1978. 

Department or agency: Transportation: Federal Aviation Administration; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Treasury: U.S. Customs Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Treasury: Financial Crimes Enforcement Network; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Treasury: Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms[B]; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Treasury: Secret Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Central Intelligence Agency[C]; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): [Empty]; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): [Empty]; 
Photo radar (PR): [Empty]; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Nuclear Regulatory Commission; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: Office of National Drug Control Policy[B]; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Department or agency: U.S. Postal Service; 
Facial recognition technology (FRT): No; 
Red-light cameras (RLC): No; 
Photo radar (PR): No; 
Program: [Empty]; 
Fiscal year funding began: [Empty]. 

Legend: R&D = research and development. 

[A] Did not respond to our survey. 

[B] Did not complete the survey but reported no involvement in any of 
the three technologies. 

[C] Declined to reply to our survey. 

[End of table] 

[End of section] 

Footnotes: 

[1] Biometrics refers to the use of a person's physical 
characteristics or personal behavioral traits (e.g., fingerprints, 
signature verification, iris scan, hand or finger geometry, facial 
recognition) to identify, or verify the claimed identity of, that 
individual. Biometric technology can be used to verify the true 
identity of individuals accessing information systems and entering 
secured facilities. 

[2] For the purposes of this report, we used the following 
definitions: Research and development includes the testing of the 
three surveillance technologies. Deployment means the purchase of 
technology equipment for agency use as a law enforcement or safety 
tool. Promotion means encouraging other federal, state, or local 
agencies through media campaigns, advertising, or the offer of grants 
to use the technologies for law enforcement or safety purposes. 

[3] Transportation's Federal Highway Administration reported 
obligating funds as early as fiscal year 1993 but did not indicate any 
pre-1997 funding (see table 2). The funds were obligated for multiyear 
contracts or grants that were first funded in 1993 but that were 
closed in later fiscal years. The obligated funds were reported in the 
year that the contract or grant was completed (i.e., after 1997). 

[End of section]