23 C.F.R. § 924.13

Evaluation

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

(a) The HSIP evaluation process shall include:

(1) A process to analyze and assess the results achieved by the program of highway safety improvement projects in terms of contributions to improved safety outcomes and the attainment of safety performance targets established as per 23 U.S.C. 150.

(2) An evaluation of the SHSP as part of the regularly recurring update process to:

(i) Confirm the validity of the emphasis areas and strategies based on analysis of current safety data; and

(ii) Identify issues related to the SHSP's process, implementation, and progress that should be considered during each subsequent SHSP update.

(b) The information resulting from paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be used:

(1) To update safety data used in the planning process in accordance with § 924.9;

(2) For setting priorities for highway safety improvement projects;

(3) For assessing the overall effectiveness of the HSIP; and

(4) For reporting required by § 924.15.

(c) The evaluation process may be financed with funds made available under 23 U.S.C. 104(b)(3) and 505, and, for metropolitan planning areas, 23 U.S.C. 104(d). The eligible use of the program funding categories listed for HSIP evaluation efforts is subject to that program's eligibility requirements and cost allocation procedures as per 2 CFR part 200.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2005–2005 · leading case: Long v. State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. & Dev., 916 So. 2d 87 (La. 2005).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Long v. State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. & Dev., 916 So. 2d 87 (La. 2005). · cites it 2× “9 and 23 C.F.R. § 924.13 . If the state uses federal funding for the proposed safety device, the state must submit an application to the Federal Highway Administration and obtain approval for funds.”

Long v. State Ex Rel. Dotd, 916 So. 2d 87 (La. 2005). · cites it 2× “9 and 23 C.F.R. § 924.13 . If the state uses federal funding for the proposed safety device, the state must submit an application to the Federal Highway Administration and obtain approval for funds.”

— 23 C.F.R. § 924.13(a) — 2 cases

Long v. State ex rel. Dep't of Transp. & Dev., 916 So. 2d 87 (La. 2005). “9 and 23 C.F.R. § 924.13 . If the state uses federal funding for the proposed safety device, the state must submit an application to the Federal Highway Administration and obtain approval for funds.”

Long v. State Ex Rel. Dotd, 916 So. 2d 87 (La. 2005). “9 and 23 C.F.R. § 924.13 . If the state uses federal funding for the proposed safety device, the state must submit an application to the Federal Highway Administration and obtain approval for funds.”

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.