Triennial Highway Safety Plan and Annual Grant Application

23 C.F.R. Part ..., Subpart B
in effectEffective: 2024-07-01

23 C.F.R. § 1300.10 General.

To apply for any highway safety grant under 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 and Section 1906, a State shall submit electronically and according to the due dates in §§ 1300.11 and 1300.12— (a) A triennial Highway Safety Plan meeting the requirements of this subpart; and (b) An annual grant application.

23 C.F.R. § 1300.11 Triennial Highway Safety Plan.

The State's triennial Highway Safety Plan documents a three-year period of the State's highway safety program that is data-driven in establishing performance targets and selecting the countermeasure strategies for programming funds to meet those performance targets. (a) Due date for submission. A State shall submit its triennial Highway Safety Plan electronically to NHTSA no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT on July 1 preceding the first fiscal year covered by the plan. Failure to meet this deadline may result in delayed approval of the triennial Highway Safety Plan which could impact approval and funding under a State's annual grant application. (b) Contents. In order to be approved, the triennial highway safety plan submitted by the State must cover three fiscal years, beginning with the first fiscal year following submission of the plan, and contain the following components: (1) Highway safety planning process and problem identification. (i) Description of the processes, data sources and information used by the State in its highway safety planning (i.e., problem identification, public participation and engagement, performance measures, and countermeasure strategies); and (ii) Description and analysis of the State's overall highway safety problems as identified through an analysis of data, including but not limited to fatality, injury, enforcement, judicial, geospatial and sociodemographic data. (2) Public participation and engagement—(i) Triennial HSP engagement planning. Description of the State's public participation and engagement planning efforts in the highway safety planning process and program, including— (A) A statement of the State's starting goals for the public engagement efforts, including how the public engagement efforts will contribute to the development of the State's highway safety program, including countermeasure strategies for programming funds; (B) Identification of the affected and potentially affected communities, including particular emphasis on underserved communities and communities overrepresented in the data, (i.e., what communities did the State identify at the outset of the process) and a description of how those communities were identified; (ii) Triennial HSP engagement outcomes. A narrative description of the outcomes of the State's engagement efforts in the highway safety planning process, including— (A) The steps taken by the State to produce meaningful engagement with affected communities, including— (1) Engagement opportunities conducted and a description of how those opportunities were designed to reach the communities identified in paragraph (b)(2)(i)(B) of this section; (2) Accessibility measures implemented by the State in its outreach efforts and in conducting engagement opportunities; (B) The results of the engagement opportunities conducted, including— (1) A description of attendees and participants, and, to the extent feasible, whether those participants are members of the affected communities identified in paragraph (2)(i)(B); (2) A summary of the issues covered; and (C) How the affected communities' comments and views have been incorporated into the development of the triennial HSP. (iii) Ongoing engagement planning. A description of the public participation and engagement efforts in the State highway safety program that the State plans to undertake during the three-year period covered by the triennial HSP, including— (A) A statement of the State's goals for the public engagement efforts; (B) Identification of the affected and potentially affected communities, including particular emphasis on underserved communities and communities overrepresented in the data (i.e., what communities did the State identify at the outset of the process), and a description of how those communities were identified; (C) The steps the State plans to take to reach and engage those communities, including accessibility measures implemented by the State in its outreach efforts and in conducting engagement opportunities; and (D) How the affected communities' comments and views will be incorporated into the decision-making process. (3) Performance plan. (i) List of data-driven, quantifiable and measurable highway safety performance targets, as laid out in paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section, that demonstrate constant or improved performance over the three-year period covered by the triennial HSP and based on highway safety program areas identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section. (ii) All performance measures developed by NHTSA in collaboration with the Governors Highway Safety Association (“Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies” (DOT HS 811 025)), as revised in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402(k)(5) and published in the Federal Register, which must be used as minimum measures in developing the performance targets identified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, provided that— (A) At least one performance measure and performance target that is data-driven shall be provided for each program area identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section that enables the State to track progress toward meeting the quantifiable annual target; (B) For each program area performance measure, the State shall provide— (1) Documentation of the current safety levels, based on the most currently available data; (2) Quantifiable performance targets that show constant or improved performance compared to the safety levels provided under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) of this section, and extend through the final year covered by the triennial HSP, with annual benchmarks to assist States in tracking progress; and (3) Justification for each performance target that explains how the target is data-driven, including a discussion of the factors that influenced the performance target selection; and (C) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section, State HSP performance targets are identical to the State DOT targets for common performance measures (fatality, fatality rate, and serious injuries) reported in the HSIP annual report, as coordinated through the State SHSP. (iii) Additional performance measures not included under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. For program areas identified by the State where performance measures have not been jointly developed (e.g., risky drivers, vulnerable road users, etc.) and for which States are using highway safety program grant funds, the State shall develop its own performance measures and performance targets that are data-driven, and shall provide the same information as required under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. (iv) For fiscal year 2024 only, the performance targets submitted for common performance measures under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section are not required to be identical to the State DOT targets reported in the HSIP annual report. (4) Countermeasure strategy for programming funds. For each program area identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a description of the countermeasure strategies that will guide the State's program implementation and annual project selection in order to achieve specific performance targets described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, including, at a minimum— (i) The problem identified during the planning process described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section that the countermeasure strategy addresses and a description of the link between the problem identification and the countermeasure strategy; (ii) A list of the countermeasures that the State will implement, including— (A) For countermeasures rated 3 or more stars in Countermeasures That Work, recommended in a NHTSA-facilitated program assessment report, or included in the Uniform Guidelines for State Highway Safety Programs, provide the citation to the countermeasure in the most recent edition of Countermeasures That Work; or (B) For all other countermeasures, provide justification supporting the countermeasure, including available data, data analysis, research, evaluation and/or substantive anecdotal evidence, that supports the effectiveness of the proposed countermeasure strategy; (iii) Identification of the performance target(s) the countermeasure strategy will address, along with an explanation of the link between the effectiveness of the countermeasure strategy and the performance target; (iv) A description of any Federal funds that the State plans to use to carry out the countermeasure strategy including, at a minimum, the funding source(s) (e.g., Section 402, Section 405(b), etc.) and an estimated allocation of funds; (v) A description of considerations the State will use to determine what projects to fund to implement the countermeasure strategy, including, as applicable, public engagement, traffic safety data, affected communities, impacted locations, solicitation of proposals; and P>(vi) A description of the manner in which the countermeasure strategy was informed by the uniform guidelines issued in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402(a)(2) and, if applicable, NHTSA-facilitated programmatic assessments. (5) Performance report. A report on the State's progress towards meeting State performance targets from the most recently submitted triennial HSP, based on the most currently available data, including— (i) An explanation of the extent to which the State's progress in achieving those targets aligns with the triennial HSP; and (ii) A description of how the countermeasure strategies implemented during the triennial period contributed to meeting the State's highway safety performance targets. (c) Review and approval procedures—(1) General. Subject to paragraphs (c)(2) and (4) of this section, the Regional Administrator shall review and approve or disapprove a triennial HSP within 60 days after date of receipt. NHTSA will not approve a triennial HSP that does not meet the requirements of this section. (2) Additional information. NHTSA may request additional information from a State to ensure compliance with the requirements of this part. Upon receipt of the request, the State must submit the requested information within 7 business days. NHTSA may extend the deadline for approval or disapproval of the triennial HSP by no more than 90 additional days, as necessary to facilitate the request. (3) Approval or disapproval of triennial Highway Safety Plan. Within 60 days after receipt of the triennial HSP under this subpart, the Regional Administrator shall issue— (i) A letter of approval, with conditions, if any, to the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety; or (ii) A letter of disapproval to the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety informing the State of the reasons for disapproval and requiring resubmission of the triennial HSP with any modifications necessary for approval. (4) Resubmission of disapproved triennial Highway Safety Plan. The State shall resubmit the triennial HSP with necessary modifications within 30 days after the date of disapproval. The Regional Administrator shall issue a letter of approval or disapproval within 30 days after receipt of a revised triennial HSP resubmitted as provided in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section.

23 C.F.R. § 1300.12 Annual grant application.

The State's annual grant application provides project level information on the State's highway safety program and demonstrates alignment with the State's most recent triennial HSP. Each fiscal year, the State shall submit an annual grant application, including appendices A and B to this part, that meets the following requirements: (a) Due date for submission. A State shall submit its annual grant application electronically to NHTSA no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT on August 1 preceding the fiscal year to which the application applies. Failure to meet this deadline may result in delayed approval and funding of a State's Section 402 grant or disqualification from receiving a Section 405 or Section 1906 racial profiling data collection grant to avoid a delay in awarding grants to all States. (b) Contents. In order to be approved, the annual grant application submitted by the State must contain the following components: (1) Updates to triennial HSP. Any updates, as necessary, to any analysis included in the triennial Highway Safety Plan of the State, at the level of detail required by § 1300.11, including at a minimum: (i) Adjustments to countermeasure strategy for programming funds. (A) If the State adjusts the strategy for programming funds, a narrative description of the means by which the State's strategy for programming funds was adjusted and informed by the most recent annual report submitted under § 1300.35; or (B) If the State does not adjust the strategy for programming funds, a written explanation of why the State made no adjustments. (ii) The State may add performance measures based on updated traffic safety problem identification or as part of an application for a grant under section 405, but may not amend existing performance targets. Provided, however, that States may amend common performance targets developed under § 1300.11(b)(3)(iv) only if necessary to submit identical targets to FHWA in the HSIP annual reports. (2) Project and subrecipient information. For each project to be funded by the State using grant funds during the fiscal year covered by the application, the State must provide— (i) Project name and description, including, at a minimum, a description of activities conducted, location where the project is performed, and affected communities, where applicable; (ii) Federal funding source(s) (i.e., Section 402, Section 405(b), etc.); (iii) Project agreement number (which, if necessary, may be provided in a later amendment to the annual grant application); (iv) Subrecipient(s) (including name and type of organization; e.g., county or city DOT, State or local law enforcement, non-profit, EMS agency, etc.); (v) Amount of Federal funds; (vi) Eligible use of funds; (vii) Whether the costs are Planning and Administration costs pursuant to § 1300.13(a) and the amount; (viii) Whether the project will be used to meet the requirements of § 1300.41(b); and (ix) The countermeasure strategy or strategies for programming funds identified in the most recently submitted triennial HSP under § 1300.11(b)(4) or in an update to the triennial HSP submitted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section that the project supports. (3) Section 405 grant and Section 1906 racial profiling data collection grant applications. Application(s) for any of the national priority safety program grants and the racial profiling data collection grant, in accordance with the requirements of subpart C of this part and as provided in appendix B to this part, signed by the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety. (4) Certifications and Assurances. The Certifications and Assurances for 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 and Section 1906 grants contained in appendix A, signed by the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety, certifying to the annual grant application contents and providing assurances that the State will comply with applicable laws and financial and programmatic requirements. (c) Review and approval procedures—(1) General. Upon receipt and initial review of the annual grant application, NHTSA may request additional information from a State to ensure compliance with the requirements of this part. Failure to respond promptly to a request for additional information concerning the Section 402 grant application may result in delayed approval and funding of a State's Section 402 grant. Failure to respond promptly to a request for additional information concerning a Section 405 or Section 1906 grant application may result in a State's disqualification from consideration for a Section 405 or Section 1906 grant to avoid a delay in awarding grants to all States. NHTSA will not approve a grant application that does not meet the requirements of this section. (2) Approval or disapproval of annual grant application. Within 60 days after receipt of the annual grant application under this subpart, the NHTSA administrator shall notify States in writing of grant awards and specify any conditions or limitations imposed by law on the use of funds. (d) Amendments to project and subrecipient information. Notwithstanding the requirement in paragraph (b)(2) of this section to provide project and subrecipient information at the time of application, States may amend the annual grant application throughout the fiscal year of the grant to add projects or to update project information for previously submitted projects, consistent with the process set forth in § 1300.32, provided that all required project and subrecipient information must be complete at the time the State submits the annual report required under § 1300.35.

23 C.F.R. § 1300.13 Special funding conditions for Section 402 grants.

The State's highway safety program under Section 402 shall be subject to the following conditions, and approval under § 1300.12 shall be deemed to incorporate these conditions: (a) Planning and administration (P & A) costs. (1)(i) Planning and administration (P & A) costs are those direct and indirect costs that are attributable to the management of the Highway Safety Agency. Such costs could include salaries, related personnel benefits, travel expenses, and rental costs specific to the Highway Safety Agency. The salary of an accountant on the State highway safety agency staff is an example of a direct cost attributable to P & A. Centralized support services such as personnel, procurement, and budgeting would be indirect costs. (ii) Program management costs are those costs attributable to a program area (e.g., salary and travel expenses of an impaired driving program manager/coordinator of a State highway safety agency). Compensation for activity hours of a DWI (Driving While Intoxicated) enforcement officer is an example of a direct cost attributable to a project. (2) Federal participation in P & A activities shall not exceed 50 percent of the total cost of such activities, or the applicable sliding scale rate in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 120. The Federal contribution for P & A activities shall not exceed 18 percent of the total funds the State receives under Section 402. In accordance with 23 U.S.C. 120(i), the Federal share payable for projects in the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands shall be 100 percent. The Indian Country is exempt from the P & A requirements. NHTSA funds shall be used only to fund P & A activities attributable to NHTSA programs. (3) P & A tasks and related costs shall be described in the P & A module of the State's annual grant application. The State's matching share shall be determined on the basis of the total P & A costs in the module. (4) A State may allocate salary and related costs of State highway safety agency employees to one of the following, depending on the activities performed: (i) If an employee works solely performing P & A activities, the total salary and related costs may be programmed to P & A; (ii) If the employee works performing program management activities in one or more program areas, the total salary and related costs may be charged directly to the appropriate area(s); or (iii) If an employee works on a combination of P & A and program management activities, the total salary and related costs may be charged to P & A and the appropriate program area(s) based on the actual time worked under each area. If the State highway safety agency elects to allocate costs based on actual time spent on an activity, the State highway safety agency must keep accurate time records showing the work activities for each employee. (b) Participation by political subdivisions (local expenditure requirement)—(1) Determining local expenditure. In determining whether a State meets the requirement that 40 percent (or 95 percent for Indian tribes) of Section 402 funds be expended by political subdivisions (also referred to as the local expenditure requirement) in a fiscal year, NHTSA will apply the requirement sequentially to each fiscal year's apportionments, treating all apportionments made from a single fiscal year's authorizations as a single amount for this purpose. Therefore, at least 40 percent of each State's apportionments (or at least 95 percent of the apportionment to the Secretary of the Interior) from each year's authorizations must be used in the highway safety programs of its political subdivisions prior to the end of the fiscal year. (2) Direct expenditures by political subdivisions. When Federal funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 402 are expended by a political subdivision under a subaward from the State, such expenditures clearly qualify as part of the required local expenditure. A political subdivision may expend funds through direct performance of projects (including planning and administration of eligible highway safety project-related activities) or by entering into contracts or subawards with other entities (including non-profit entities) to carry out projects on its behalf. (3) Expenditures by State on behalf of a political subdivision. Federal funds apportioned under 23 U.S.C. 402 that are expended by a State on behalf of a specific political subdivision (either through direct performance of projects or by entering into contracts or subawards with other entities) may qualify as part of the required local expenditure, provided there is evidence of the political subdivision's involvement in identifying its traffic safety need(s) and input into implementation of the activity within its jurisdiction. A State may not arbitrarily ascribe State agency expenditures as “on behalf of a local government.” Such expenditures qualify if— (i) The specific political subdivision is involved in the planning process of the State's highway safety program (for example, as part of the public participation described in § 1300.11(b)(2), as part of the State's planning for the annual grant application, or as part of ongoing planning processes), and the State then enters into agreements based on identification of need by the political subdivision and implements the project or activity accordingly. The State must maintain documentation that shows the political subdivision's participation in the planning processes (e.g., meeting minutes, data submissions, etc.), and also must obtain written acceptance by the political subdivision of the project or activity being provided on its behalf prior to implementation. (ii) The political subdivision is not involved in the planning process of the State's highway safety program, but submits a request for the State to implement a project on its behalf. The request does not need to be a formal application but should, at minimum, contain a description of the political subdivision's problem identification and a description of where and/or how the project or activity should be deployed to have effect within political subdivision (may include: identification of media outlets to run advertising, locations for billboard/sign placement or enforcement activities, schools or other venues to provide educational programming, specific sporting events/venues, etc.). (4) Allocation of qualifying costs. Expenditures qualify as local expenditures only when the expenditures meet the qualification criteria described in paragraphs (b)(2) and (3) of this section. In some cases, only a portion of the expenditures under a given project may meet those requirements. States must allocate funds in proportion to the amount of costs that can be documented to meet the requirements for a specific political subdivision. (5) Waivers. While, in extraordinary circumstances, the requirement for participation by political subdivisions may be waived in whole or in part by the NHTSA Administrator, it is expected that each State program will generate and maintain political subdivision participation at the level specified in the Federal statute so that requests for waivers are minimized. Where a waiver is requested, however, the State shall submit a written request describing the extraordinary circumstances that necessitate a waiver, or providing a conclusive showing of the absence of legal authority over highway safety activities at the political subdivision levels of the State, and must recommend the appropriate percentage participation to be applied in lieu of the required 40 percent or 95 percent (for Indian Tribes) local expenditure. (c) Use of grant funds for marijuana-impaired driving. A State that has legalized medicinal or recreational marijuana shall consider implementing programs to— (1) Educate drivers regarding the risks associated with marijuana-impaired driving; and (2) Reduce injuries and deaths resulting from marijuana-impaired driving. (d) Use of grant funds for unattended passengers program. The State must use a portion of grant funds received under Section 402 to carry out a program to educate the public regarding the risks of leaving a child or unattended passenger in a vehicle after the vehicle motor is deactivated by the operator. (e) Use of grant funds for teen traffic safety program. The State may use a portion of the funds received under Section 402 to implement statewide efforts to improve traffic safety for teen drivers. (f) Prohibition on use of grant funds to check for helmet usage. No grant funds under this part may be used for programs to check helmet usage or to create checkpoints that specifically target motorcyclists. (g) Prohibition on use of grant funds for automated traffic enforcement systems. The State may not expend funds apportioned to the State under Section 402 to carry out a program to purchase, operate, or maintain an automated traffic enforcement system except in a work zone or school zone. Any ATES system installed using grant funds under this section must comply with guidelines established by the Secretary, as updated.

23 C.F.R. § 1300.15 Apportionment and obligation of Federal funds.

(a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, on October 1 of each fiscal year, or soon thereafter, the NHTSA Administrator shall, in writing, distribute funds available for obligation under 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 and Section 1906 to the States and specify any conditions or limitations imposed by law on the use of the funds. (b) In the event that authorizations exist but no applicable appropriation act has been enacted by October 1 of a fiscal year, the NHTSA Administrator may, in writing, distribute a part of the funds authorized under 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 and Section 1906 contract authority to the States to ensure program continuity, and in that event shall specify any conditions or limitations imposed by law on the use of the funds. Upon appropriation of grant funds, the NHTSA Administrator shall, in writing, promptly adjust the obligation limitation and specify any conditions or limitations imposed by law on the use of the funds. (c) Funds distributed under paragraph (a) or (b) of this section shall be available for expenditure by the States to satisfy the Federal share of expenses under the approved annual grant application, and shall constitute a contractual obligation of the Federal Government, subject to any conditions or limitations identified in the distributing document. Such funds shall be available for expenditure by the States as provided in § 1300.41(b), after which the funds shall lapse. (d) Notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph (c) of this section, payment of State expenses under 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 or Section 1906 shall be contingent upon the State's submission of up-to-date information about approved projects in the annual grant application, in accordance with §§ 1300.12(b)(2) and 1300.32.

Starting a business? Corpus forms LLCs in all 50 states and DC.