HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.
![handle is hein.gao/gaobaaxez0001 and id is 1 raw text is:
DCCUMENT RESUME
C5903 - f B1166101 ]
Rail Crossinq Safety: At What Price? CED-78-83; B-164497(3).
April 25, 1978. 34 pp. + 5 appendices 416 FF.).
Report to the Congress; by Elmer B. SLaats, Comptroller General.
Issue Area: Transportation Systems and Policies: Hotor
Vehicle-highway Transportation System 4240e).
Contact: Community and Economic Develkment Div.
Budqet Function: Commerce and Transportation (400); Commerce and
Transportation: Ground Transportation (404).
Orqanization Concerned: Department of Iranaportation; Federal
Hiqhway Administration.
Congressional Relevance: House Comsittee on Public Morks and
Transportation; Senate Committee ot Envircnment and Public
Works; Congress.
Authority: Railroad Safety Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-45C). Highway
Safety Act of 1970 (P.L. 91-605). Highvay Safety Act of 1973
(P.L. 93-87). Highway Safety Act of 191f (P.L. 94-280).
Hiqh way Eafety legislation includes provisions for
supplementing State spending for safety eaaures at tail-highway
crossinqs. The Fe, eral Highway Administration (PHA) has
designated several types of s&fety isrcvements that ay be
federally funded, including bettez warning devices or
elimination of crossings. The Highway Safety Act of 1976° reduced
the percentage of highway safety funds available for high-hazard
locations and roadside obstacles and acre than doubleo the
funding for improvements at railroad crossings although only 2%
of hiqhv&y deaths occur at grade crossings.
Findinqs/Conclusions: FHWA has not told States what level of
safety tLey should provide at crossings. As a result, States
have widely divergent policies for -iupoving crossing safety.
Durinq 1975, about 38% of crossing accidents occurred at
locations having active warning devices. Imrovement in law
enforcement and drivers' education may offer alternatives to
warninq devices. State and Federal officials favo, naticnvide
safety standards but anticipate difficulties in agreeing on a
qoal and in fundinq. Highway legislation established specific
funding levels for various prograns, but such categorical
funding does not give States the necessary flexibility to meet
their most critical needs. States contended that high-hazard
projects were the most cost beneficial, but some czcsaiug
prolects were also considered sound investments. FHNI has
proposed leqislation that wout combine six categorical safety
programs into a unified fund. Recommendations: The Secretary of
Transportation should require FHVA, the Federal Railroad
Administration, and the National Highway Traffic Safety
kdninisttation to cooperate with the States an4 railrnds in
establishing a nationwide level of safety acceptable for
rail-highway crossings and determining the best mixture of
methods, including education and enfcrcement, to achieve that](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.gao/gaobaaxez0001&div=1&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)