Highway Safety: Preliminary Observations on Efforts to Implement Changes in the Highway Safety Improvement Program Since SAFETEA-LU Page: 4 of 17
This text is part of the collection entitled: Government Accountability Office Reports and was provided to UNT Digital Library by the UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
* To advance public awareness of highway safety, states must now analyze
safety hazards on all their public roads and report the most hazardous 5
percent of these locations, in what is known as the "5 percent report," to
FHWA for posting on its public Web site.
* The act authorized a $220 million per year set-aside of funds for rail-
highway crossing improvements under an existing rail-highway crossing
program established in the Highway Safety Improvement Act of 1973.
* The act created a new $90 million per year set-aside for infrastructure
projects on high-risk rural roads and defined these roads.
* The act added a provision that allows states to transfer, or flex, up to 10
percent of their HSIP funds to behavioral and emergency medical services
projects4 provided the state has adopted a strategic highway safety plan
and certified that it has met all its safety infrastructure needs.
FHWA is not alone in funding state safety programs. NHTSA and FMCSA
administer almost half of federal safety funding through grants provided to
states for their safety programs. These grants are generally for behavioral
projects. The Department of Transportation (DOT) encourages states to
align their NHTSA- or FMCSA-funded programs with the strategic highway
safety plans they develop in implementing HSIP, but such alignment is not
required.
My testimony today addresses (1) the extent to which states have
implemented HSIP requirements set forth in SAFETEA-LU, including key
elements of strategic highway safety plans and crash data analysis
systems, (2) the types of guidance and assistance FHWA provided to the
states to support them in planning and carrying out HSIP, and (3) the
results to date of states' efforts in carrying out HSIP, including the results
of the set-aside programs for rail-highway crossings and for high-risk rural
roads.
My testimony is based on preliminary work we are doing for this
Committee for a review of HSIP scheduled for release later this year. To
examine states' strategic highway safety planning, we reviewed strategic
4SAFETEA-LU states that approved states can flex HSIP funds to noninfrastructure
projects that are identified in their strategic highway safety plans. According to FHWA
officials, noninfrastructure projects are generally behavioral and emergency medical
services projects.GAO-08-1015T
Page 2
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This text can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Text.
United States. Government Accountability Office. Highway Safety: Preliminary Observations on Efforts to Implement Changes in the Highway Safety Improvement Program Since SAFETEA-LU, text, July 17, 2008; Washington D.C.. (https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc293046/m1/4/: accessed April 20, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, UNT Digital Library, https://digital.library.unt.edu; crediting UNT Libraries Government Documents Department.