Crossing grants Guide 07
How Section 130 crossing projects are chosen
Section 130 funds railroad crossing improvements through state programs that identify needs and schedule projects. A crossing's inclusion depends on the state's process and engineering review, not simply on whether it has gates.
For residents, city engineers and local transport staff.
Federal law requires a survey and a project schedule.
Under 23 U.S.C. §130(d), states maintain a survey to identify crossings that may need separation, relocation or warning devices, and establish and implement a schedule of projects.
That requirement does not promise a particular treatment at every crossing. A local request should identify the crossing and the specific conditions needing review.
Sources: 23 U.S.C. §130; FHWA: Section 130 policy and guidance.
FHWA administers the federal program.
FHWA publishes program policy and eligibility guidance. States manage their own crossing project programs within that framework.
Section 130 can support more than installing gates. Read the current guidance before assuming that only one type of crossing work qualifies.
Sources: FHWA: Section 130 policy and guidance.
Reported warning equipment differs across public crossings.
| Warning equipment | Public crossings (Crossings) |
|---|---|
| Gates | 55,319 |
| Flashing lights, no gates | 13,756 |
| Signs only | 52,764 |
| Other or not reported | 4,327 |
Categories describe reported equipment. They do not confirm its condition or establish which upgrade a crossing needs.
States set out their selection process.
Ask the state transport agency which process applies and when proposals are reviewed. Minnesota DOT's published selection page is one example of how a state describes its approach.
Submit the crossing ID, the problem observed, supporting records and the road authority's contact. A federal incident total alone cannot describe local access, road geometry or proposed work.
A selection index and a prediction serve different purposes.
A state may use its own screening measures alongside site reviews. FRA's predicted annual values are another input with their own model assumptions.
Do not turn either value into a public list of crossings ordered by safety. Ask how the agency uses the measure and what other evidence enters its decision.
Sources: FRA: GXAPS purpose and limitations.
Ask the state to review a specific crossing.
Start with the road authority and the state's crossing program contact. Describe the improvement you want considered and distinguish observed conditions from older inventory fields.
If gates appear in a later inventory version, confirm the installation date and funding source in the project record. The inventory change only establishes when the reported field changed.
Your next step