23 C.F.R. § 646.218

Simplified procedure for accelerating grade crossing improvements

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) The procedure set forth in this section is encouraged for use in simplifying and accelerating the processing of single or multiple grade crossing improvements.

(b) Eligible preliminary engineering costs may include those incurred in selecting crossings to be improved, determining the type of improvement for each crossing, estimating the cost and preparing the required agreement.

(1) Identification of each crossing location.

(2) Description of improvement and estimate of cost for each crossing location.

(3) Estimated schedule for completion of work at each location.

(d) Following programming, authorization and approval of the agreement under § 646.218(c), FHWA may authorize construction, including acquisition of warning device materials, with the condition that work at any particular location will not be undertaken until the proposed or executed State-railroad agreement under § 646.216(d)(2) is found satisfactory by FHWA and the final plans, specifications, and estimates are approved and with the condition that only material actually incorporated into the project will be eligible for Federal participation.

(e) Work programmed and authorized under this simplified procedure should include only that which can reasonably be expected to reach the construction stage within one year and be completed within two years after the initial authorization date.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 4 cases, 1999–2004 · leading case: Kelli Smallwood v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co. Mississippi Dep't of Transp., 385 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Kelli Smallwood v. Illinois Cent. R.R. Co. Mississippi Dep't of Transp., 385 F.3d 568 (5th Cir. 2004). “…appropriate. . FRSA does address a timeline for an accelerated project, but such a project is not at issue here. See 23 C.F.R. § 646.218 .”

Powers v. CSX Transp., Inc., 97 F. Supp. 2d 1297 (S.D. Ala. 2000). “First, the CSX defendants refer to 23 C.F.R. § 646.218 , which sets forth a simplified procedure for accelerating grade crossing improvements.”

Bock v. St. Louis Sw. Ry. Co., 181 F.3d 920 (8th Cir. 1999). “The Main Street crossing upgrade was not an "accelerated'' project under 23 C.F.R. § 646.218 . If it were, that regulation would have allowed up to two years from and after the project authorization date (September 9, 1991) for completion of the project.”

Smallwood v. IL Cent. RR Co, 355 F.3d 357 (5th Cir. 2004). “See 23 C.F.R. § 646.218 . 43 Jones Garden Apartments, Inc.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.