Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

FHWA Home | Feedback

Home | About | Staff Directory | Events | Newsletters | Contact Search FHWA Safety: Go

Highway Safety Home > SAFETEA-LU

Program Contact
Improvement Program
(HSIP) Memorandum John Dewar
john.dewar2@dot.gov
Intersection Safety
US Department of Transportation 202-366-2218
Local & Rural Road Safety
Federal Highway Administration Highlights
Pedestrian & Bicycle
Safety Reporting Guidance
Subject: ACTION: High Risk Rural Roads Program Guidance on Highway Safety
Roadway Departure Safety Requirements under 23 U.S.C. §148 (a)(1)&(f) Improvement
Program
Speed Management Safety Date: May 19, 2006
Memorandum on
Additional Safety Programs From: Jeffrey A. Lindley, Associate Administrator for Safety Highway Safety
& Initiatives Improvement
Reply to Attn. of: HSA-20 Program (HSIP)
9 Proven Crash
Countermeasures Reporting Guidance
To: Division Administrators
Crash Tested Hardware The HSIP, codified as section 148 of title 23, U.S.C., (23 U.S.C.
§148), was elevated to a core program as a result of the
Facts & Statistics
passage of the SAFETEA-LU, Public Law 109-59. The
Geometric Design SAFETEA-LU introduced a new set-aside provision known as
the High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRRP), codified as 23
Manual on Uniform Traffic U.S.C. §148 (f). The attached interim guidance provides State
Control Devices (MUTCD) Departments of Transportation with basic preliminary
information to implement and administer this new program.
Motorcycles
As a new statutory requirement, we expect to learn from
Newsletters ongoing implementation practices in the HRRRP. Best practices
and implementation techniques associated with the State’s
Older Road Users
application of this provision will be shared nationally and could
Policy & Guidelines include modifications to this guidance. We welcome ideas and
suggestions on how to better identify and analyze safety needs
Railway-Highway Grade on rural roads that will lead to better use of limited HRRRP
Crossings funds.

Road Safety Audits (RSA) This program represents a significant step toward recognizing
the need to reduce fatalities on rural roads, which account for
Safe Routes to School almost two-thirds of the over 43,000 roadway fatalities in the
U.S. If we are to make headway in reducing fatalities and
SAFETEA–LU
serious injuries, we must improve safety on rural roads,
Safety Research regardless of ownership.

Section 402 Highway If you have questions or comments on this guidance, please
Safety Funds contact Ms. Leslie Wright of the Office of Safety at (202) 366-
2176 or E-mail at leslie.wright@dot.gov. see update*
Training & Education
Attachment
Tools & Technology
UPDATED CONTACT PERSON (12/30/08): John Dewar at
Work Zones (202) 366-2218 or E-mail at john.dewar2@dot.gov.

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

High Risk Rural Roads Interim

Guidance
I. Background:

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), codified as

section 148 of title 23, United States Code (23 U.S.C. §148),
was elevated to a core program as a result of the passage of
the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity
Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), Public Law 109-59.
Additionally, SAFETEA-LU introduced a new set-aside
provision known as the High Risk Rural Roads Program
(HRRRP), codified as 23 U.S.C. §148 (f). This program is a
component of the HSIP and is set-aside after HSIP funds have
been apportioned to the States. It provides $90 million of HSIP
apportionment per year for high risk rural roads (HRRR)
highway safety improvement projects. Projects may be selected
on any public HRRR to correct or improve hazardous road
locations or features. The State’s HSIP, including the HRRR
element, shall consider the safety needs on all public roads,
whether state or locally owned.

The purpose of this document is to provide State DOTs with

basic preliminary direction in administering and implementing
the HRRR Program provisions.

II. Statutory Requirements:

23 U.S.C. §148(a)(1) defines a High Risk Rural Road (HRRR).

States are required to identify these roadways (and expend the
HRRR funds) according to the following definition:

"…any roadway functionally classified as a rural major or

minor collector or a rural local road --

A. on which the accident rate for fatalities and incapacitating

injuries exceeds the statewide average for those functional
classes of roadway; or
B. that will likely have increases in traffic volume that are likely
to create an accident rate for fatalities and incapacitating
injuries that exceeds the statewide average for those
functional classes of roadway."

23 U.S.C. §148(f) provides the following statutory language

which establishes the HRRR Program:

"High Risk Rural Roads.--

1. In general.--After making an apportionment under section

104(b)(5) for a fiscal year beginning after September 30,
2005, the Secretary shall ensure, from amounts made
available to carry out this section for such fiscal year, that a
total of $90,000,000 of such apportionment is set aside by
the States, proportionally according to the share of each
State of the total amount so apportioned, for use only for
construction and operational improvements on high risk
rural roads.
2. Special rule.--A State may use funds apportioned to the
State pursuant to this subsection for any project under this
section if the State certifies to the Secretary that the State

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

has met all of State needs for construction and operational

improvements on high risk rural roads." [Emphasis added]

Approximately 60% of fatalities nationwide occur on rural roads.

The FHWA anticipates that the Special Rule provision found in
section 148(f)(2) will be used only in rare cases where States
have few if any roads eligible for the program, e.g. the District
of Columbia.

States should consider the safety needs on all eligible public

HRRRs, whether state or locally owned. The following definition
of a public road and a public authority are provided for
reference:

Public Road: 23 U.S.C. §101(a)(27) defines "public road" as

"…any road or street under the jurisdiction of and
maintained by a public authority and open to public travel."
Public Authority: 23 U.S.C. §101(a)(23) defines "public
authority" as "…a Federal, State, county, town, or township,
Indian tribe, municipal or other local government or
instrumentality with authority to finance, build, operate, or
maintain toll or toll-free facilities."

III. The Relationship Between HSIP and HRRRP:

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core

Federal-aid highway program and is intended to achieve
significant reductions in traffic fatalities and serious injuries on
public roads. The HRRRP is a component of the HSIP and
supports road safety program efforts through the
implementation of construction and operational improvements
on high risk rural roads. The HSIP including the HRRR element
must consider all public roads.

Examples of construction and operational improvements may

include, but are not limited to, those found in 23 U.S.C.
§148(a)(3)(B). Please refer to Attachment I of this document.
[Note: Some items, as noted in the attachment, are not eligible
for funding under the HRRR provision because they are not
construction and operational improvements.]

IV. Two Step Process: Identify Eligible

Roadways and Analyze the Highway Safety
Problem:

Data is imperative to both steps of the process outlined in this

section. Ideally, a State’s roadway and crash data systems
should be able to identify the location of all the fatal and
incapacitating injuries occurring on all public roads, including
those off the State highway system.

With regard to these data needs, States can be classified in one

of two categories: those with a comprehensive statewide crash
and roadway data system, and those working towards a
comprehensive statewide data system. With this in mind, FHWA
recognizes that many State DOTs may not immediately be able
to identify HRRRs off their State highway systems. If a State
does not currently have the capability of locating crashes on all
public roadways, the State may adopt interim practices that
utilize the best available data resources until a comprehensive
statewide roadway and crash data system is implemented. To
ensure that a harmonized program is applied, common interim

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

practices should be used statewide. Attachment II provides a

list of funding sources for traffic safety data activities that States
and local entities might utilize as they move toward the
development of a comprehensive statewide crash and roadway
data system.

The HRRR reporting section of the HSIP annual report [23

U.S.C. §148(g)],
[http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/guides/guide040406.cfm],
requests information on the data-based methods that were
used to identify roadway segments for the HRRR Program in
the absence of a comprehensive statewide roadway and crash
data system and a list of the steps underway to improve the
data systems to permit the required analysis.

As States implement the HRRR Program there are two vital

steps associated with this process: 1) identify eligible roadways;
and 2) analyze the highway safety problem with available tools
and information. Specific guidance related to each step is
outlined below.

STEP ONE: Identify Eligible Roadways. As stated in

SAFETEA-LU, eligible roadways must have rates that exceed
the statewide average for the respective roadway functional
classifications. States should use two types of data in identifying
roadways that exceed the statewide average rate for fatalities
and incapacitating injuries: crash data (e.g. fatalities and
incapacitating injuries), and exposure data [e.g. vehicle miles
traveled (VMT), average daily traffic (ADT), lane miles, etc.].
Within the limits of the law, States have a great deal of
flexibility in identifying eligible roadways. Regardless of the
measures used, States should focus on data driven methods,
with the understanding that as crash and roadway data systems
mature, the roadway identification process will become more
sophisticated.

a. Fatal and incapacitating injury crash data

i. States with comprehensive statewide crash and
roadway data systems should have the ability to
specifically locate fatal and incapacitating injuries on all
public roads on the respective roadway functional
classifications (rural major and minor collectors, and
rural local roads) and determine accurate crash rates.
ii. States working toward a comprehensive statewide
crash and roadway data system should utilize available
federal, state and local resources including the
following:
1. State and local crash files for fatal and
incapacitating injury crashes that are located on
rural major and minor collectors and rural local
roads.
2. Other State or local fatal and injury data sources
that may provide information on the severity of
injuries resulting from crashes. Examples of such
data sources include: emergency medical services
(data on severity of injuries sustained in a crash);
enforcement agencies (data related to the overall
severity of a crash); and hospitals (data related to
the end result of injuries sustained). If these data
sources are used, States should link the
information to the location of the crash on the

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

respective roadway functional classification.

3. National data, such as the Fatality Analysis
Reporting System (FARS) that provides data on
crashes involving traffic-related fatalities. FARS
data can be sorted by roadway functional
classification (rural major and minor collectors, and
rural local roads); however, the specific roadway
location for the data cannot be determined.

b. Exposure data and other data used to determine rates:

i. States with comprehensive statewide crash and
roadway data systems should have the ability to
identify necessary exposure data by roadway
functional classification on all public roads on the
respective roadway functional classifications (rural
major and minor collectors, and rural local roads) and
determine accurate crash rates. Examples of exposure
data to develop a rate include:
1. vehicle miles traveled (VMT)
2. average daily traffic (ADT)
3. lane miles
4. number of vehicles entering an intersection
ii. States working toward a comprehensive statewide
crash and roadway data system may use other
sources for exposure data. A balanced data driven
approach should be used to identify eligible roadways.
1. A state may consider the relationship between
population or other "per capita" data (e.g.
registered vehicles, licensed drivers, etc.), and the
number of fatalities and incapacitating injuries of a
defined area to determine fatality and
incapacitating injury rates.
2. National data, such as the Highway Performance
Monitoring System and the FHWA’s Highway
Statistics, may be used to provide roadway data
that is derived from State data. Like FARS, this
data may be sorted by roadway functional
classification; however, the specific roadway
location for the data cannot be determined.
c. Alternate roadway identification consideration: In the
absence of necessary data related to a and b above, other
roadway identification considerations may be used. One
possible interim approach would be to consider allocation of
funds based on the distribution of fatalities and
incapacitating injuries on state vs. local roads. For
example, if 60% of fatal and incapacitating injuries occur on
local roads, 60% of the funds could be distributed to local
roads.
d. The second part of the HRRR provision of SAFETEA-LU
[23 U.S.C. §148(a)(1)(B)] addresses those roads that will
likely have increases in traffic volume that may result in an
accident rate for fatalities and incapacitating injuries
exceeding that of the statewide average. States are
encouraged to work closely with State and local planners to
identify such roads. For instance, in determining the
projected rates, among other resources and methods,
States may use specific growth projection patterns as
identified by the respective Metropolitan Planning
Organizations, city/county planning organizations, and
growth management organizations to assist with identifying
HRRRs. Examples of good sources for such information

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

are Regional Councils of Governments and Metropolitan

Planning Organizations.

STEP TWO: Analyze the Highway Safety Problem With

Available Tools and Information.

a. States with comprehensive roadway and crash data

systems may use existing data and analysis capabilities to
define the problems and select projects. Once potential
locations are identified, the data should be analyzed in
more detail to diagnose safety concerns, identify potential
countermeasures, and make final project selections.
b. States without comprehensive roadway and crash data
systems should use their best available data to define the
problem and select projects. Examples of data sources
include, but are not limited to, the following:
i. Other state- or local-based project ranking processes
that use appropriate crash data
ii. Methods that consider other data reflective of fatalities
and incapacitating injuries, such as:
1. Prioritized projects resulting from Road Safety
Audits
2. Corridor analyses that identify systematic safety
improvements. For instance, where crash and/or
roadway data suggest that many crashes occur
given a certain type roadway feature, a State may
systematically implement an appropriate
countermeasure that would improve safety
conditions on the respective roadways. (e.g. signs,
pavement markings, rumble strips, horizontal curve
treatments, etc..)
c. Alternate problem analysis consideration: Input data used to
derive the 5% "Most Severe Safety Needs" Report, 23
U.S.C. §148(c)(1)(D),
[http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/guides/guide040506.cfm
], as well as the final report information may be useful in
determining where HRRR Program funds should be
applied.

V. Program Reporting Guidance:

23 U.S.C. §148(g) establishes the HSIP reporting requirements.

Since the HRRR Program is a component of the HSIP,
information is being requested on the HRRR Program through
this provision. The report should provide information on the
HRRR Program in three parts: basic program implementation
information, methods used to select HRRR, and detailed
information assessing the HRRR Program projects. Please refer
to the HSIP Reporting Guidance for additional information.
(http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/guides/guide040406.cfm )

VII. Funding:

The HRRRP set-a-side for each State is calculated using the

same formula that is used for the HSIP apportionments: total
lane miles Federal-aid highways, total vehicle miles traveled
(VMT) on lanes on the Federal-aid highways, and number of
fatalities on the Federal-aid system. The amount available for
the HRRRP will be calculated by the FHWA each year after
apportionment of the overall HSIP funds. Although $90 million is
set aside specifically for the HRRRP, States may use their

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

discretion to expend other HSIP funds on rural roads if such

roads emerge as a safety need in the Strategic Highway Safety
Plan
(http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/guides/guide040506.cfm).

Availability of Funds: Highway safety funds are available for

obligation in the fiscal year for which they are apportioned plus
3 additional fiscal years. After that point, the funds lapse and
are no longer available for obligation. For example, FY 2006
HSIP funds apportioned to the States would lapse if not
obligated by September 30, 2009.

VIII. Attachments:

Attachment I: Sample list of construction and operational

improvements. These improvements are outlined in 23
U.S.C. Section 148(a)(3)(B).
Attachment II: List of funding sources for traffic safety data
activities (United States Department of Transportation Traffic
Records Coordinating Committee Website:
http://www.dottrcc.gov/pages/funding.htm)

Return to top

Attachment I
Sample List of Construction and Operational
Improvements
23 U.S.C. Section 148(a)(3)(B)

(B) Inclusions.--The term 'highway safety improvement project'

includes a project for one or more of the following
(i) An intersection safety improvement.
(ii) Pavement and shoulder widening (including addition of a
passing lane to remedy an
unsafe condition).
(iii) Installation of rumble strips or another warning device, if the
rumble strips or other warning devices do not adversely affect
the safety or mobility of bicyclists, pedestrians, and the
disabled.
(iv) Installation of a skid-resistant surface at an intersection or
other location with a high frequency of accidents.
(v) An improvement for pedestrian or bicyclist safety or safety of
the disabled.
(vi) Construction of any project for the elimination of hazards at
a railway-highway crossing that is eligible for funding under
section 130, including the separation or protection of grades at
railway-highway crossings.
(vii) Construction of a railway-highway crossing safety feature,
including installation of protective devices.
(viii) The conduct of a model traffic enforcement activity at a
railway-highway
crossing. (NOT eligible under HRRRP)
(ix) Construction of a traffic calming feature.
(x) Elimination of a roadside obstacle.
(xi) Improvement of highway signage and pavement markings.
(xii) Installation of a priority control system for emergency
vehicles at signalized
intersections.
(xiii) Installation of a traffic control or other warning device at a
location with high

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

accident potential.
(xiv) Safety-conscious planning. (NOT eligible under
HRRRP)
(xv) Improvement in the collection and analysis of crash data.
(NOT eligible under HRRRP)
(xvi) Planning integrated interoperable emergency
communications equipment, operational activities, or traffic
enforcement activities (including police assistance) relating to
workzone safety. (Only "operational activities relating
to workzone safety" are eligible under HRRRP;
"Planning integrated interoperable emergency
communications equipment and traffic enforcement
activities relating to workzone safety" are NOT
eligible under HRRRP)
(xvii) Installation of guardrails, barriers (including barriers
between construction work
zones and traffic lanes for the safety of motorists and workers),
and crash attenuators.
(xviii) The addition or retrofitting of structures or other measures
to eliminate or
reduce accidents involving vehicles and wildlife.
(xix) Installation and maintenance of signs (including
fluorescent, yellow-green signs) at
pedestrian-bicycle crossings and in school zones.
(xx) Construction and yellow-green signs at pedestrian-bicycle
crossings and in school zones.
(xxi) Construction and operational improvements on high risk
rural roads.

Return to top

Attachment II
FEDERAL FUNDING SOURCES
FOR TRAFFIC SAFETY DATA ACTIVITIES

The range of funding sources presently available from U.S.

Department of Transportation modal administrations to finance
traffic safety data improvements is described below. Funding for
such activities is not limited to programs specifically designated
as "data" or as "safety" funding. Instead, funding for data
improvements can be found in core programs and other
established programs not normally thought of as "safety
programs".

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration

(NHTSA) - Managed Programs

Highway Safety Programs (23USC§402). Provides for

coordinated national highway safety grant programs carried
out by the States and local communities. Database
improvements are eligible for funding.
Occupant Protection Incentive Grants (23USC§405)—Data
improvements relevant to occupant protection only.
Safety Belt Performance Grants (23USC§406)—This
incentive program encourages States to enact and enforce
laws requiring the use of safety belts in passenger motor
vehicles. A State may use these grant funds for any safety
purpose under Title 23 or for any project that corrects or
improves a hazardous roadway location or feature or
proactively addresses highway safety problems. However, at

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

least $1 million of amounts received by States must be

obligated for behavioral highway safety activities.
Alcohol-Impaired Driving Countermeasures (23USC§410)—
Data improvements relevant to alcohol programs only.
State Traffic Safety Information System Improvement Grants
(23USC§408)--Encourages States to adopt and implement
effective programs to improve the timeliness, accuracy,
completeness, uniformity, integration, and accessibility of
State data that is needed to identify priorities for national,
State, and local highway and traffic safety programs; to
evaluate the effectiveness of efforts to make such
improvements; to link these State data systems, including
traffic records, with other data systems within the State; and
to improve the compatibility of the State data system with
national data systems and data systems of other States to
enhance the ability to observe and analyze national trends in
crash occurrences, rates, outcomes, and circumstances. A
State may use these grant funds only to implement such
data improvement programs.
Highway Sanctions/Penalty Transfer Programs - If a State
did not enact and enforce appropriate laws within the time
period specified in TEA-21, certain Federal Aid highway
construction funds could be transferred into the Section 402
program for use in alcohol countermeasure programs or into
Section 148, Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP).
Funds specified for alcohol countermeasures may be used
for data improvements relevant to alcohol programs only. If
a state transfers funds into the HSIP, funds can be used for
highway safety data activities.
Minimum Penalties for Repeat Offenders for DWI or
DUI(23USC§164)
Open Container Requirements (23USC§154)

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) - Managed

Programs

Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), National

Highway System (NHS), Congestion Mitigation and Air
Quality (CMAQ), and Surface Transportation Program (STP)
– HSIP funds (23USC§148) may be used for planning,
development and operation of a system for managing
highway safety and for data improvements as they relate to
the State Highway Safety Improvement Program. However,
funds specifically reserved for Railway-Highway Crossing
(23USC§130) purposes may only be used as they directly
relate to grade crossing safety activities. NHS, CMAQ, or
STP funds may be used for safety data systems as they
relate to the planning, development, and operation of a
system for managing highway safety.
Metropolitan Planning (23USC§104(f)) – Funds may be used
in conjunction with the requirement to carry out the 3-C
transportation planning process that provides for
consideration of projects and strategies that will increase the
safety of the transportation system for motorized and non-
motorized users.
State Planning and Research Funds (23USC§505) – In
addition to carrying out the statewide transportation process,
these funds may be used to develop and maintain safety-
related data systems needed to conduct studies of the safety
of the surface transportation system, as well as to develop
and maintain a system for managing highway safety.

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration

(FMCSA) - Managed Programs

Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program (MCSAP)--

(49USC§31104) States are authorized and encouraged to
use a portion of their MCSAP funds for data collection and
analysis as well as improvements to existing systems. A
portion of MCSAP funds are available for High Priority
Projects (Section 4107) that can include commercial motor
vehicle safety data improvement initiatives. Periodically,
reallocated funding becomes available, and it also may be
spent on data improvements.
Motor Carrier Information Systems (49USC§31106) and
Motor Carrier Safety Improvement Act (49USC§225(f)) --
establishes permanent funding source for information and
analysis improvements. Funds may be used for grants,
cooperative agreements or contracts. Includes funding for
improvements to electronic vehicle-based information
systems, expanded data analysis capacity and programs,
PRISM implementation, and improvements to driver
programs.
Crash Data Improvement (CDI) – Discretionary funds
intended to support efforts in states to improve the collection
and analysis of commercial motor vehicle crash data and
maintain a high level of quality data reported to FMCSA’s
Motor Carrier Management Information System (MCMIS)
crash file.
Commercial Driver’s License Information System (CDLIS)
Modernization Grants – (Section 4123) – States or
organizations representing States must apply directly to
FMCSA for these discretionary grant funds. Funding is
awarded to modernize CDLIS at the central site and in each
State to be compatible with the comprehensive national plan
developed by FMCSA to modernize CDLIS.
Safety Data Improvement Program (SaDIP) – (Section 4128)
– Discretionary grants to States for activities to improve the
accuracy, timeliness and completeness of safety data
including, but not limited to, large truck and bus crash data,
roadside inspection, data enforcement data, driver citation
data, and registration data. Funds can be used to purchase
equipment, train law enforcement officers in collecting crash
data, hire temporary staff to manage data quality
improvement programs, revise outdated crash report forms,
and code and enter crash data.
Commercial Drivers License (CDL) Grant Program –
(Section 4124) – States must apply directly to FMCSA for
grant funds. Funding is awarded to States that demonstrate
the greatest impact on the effectiveness of the CDL program
in improving highway safety and reducing commercial motor
vehicle related crashes through a performance-base
approach.
Commercial Vehicle Information Systems and Networks
(CVISN) – (Section 4126) Discretionary grants to States to
advance the technological capabilities and promote
deployment of intelligent transportation system applications
for commercial vehicle operations, including commercial
vehicle, commercial driver, and carrier specific information
systems and networks.

Note: Please refer to the following website:

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]

Memorandum - FHWA Safety Program

http://www.dottrcc.gov/pages/funding.htm

Return to top

FHWA Home | Safety Home | US DOT Team Home | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration
FHWA Office of Safety, 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE, Washington DC 20590

You may need the following readers or viewers to view certain documents on this site:

file:///C|/...oT_FHWA_High%20Risk%20Rural%20Roads%20Program%20Guidance%20Requirements_memo%20051906.htm[1/3/2010 10:52:55 AM]