American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
An Application from the State Highway or Transportation Department of Mississippi for:
Elimination of a U.S. (Interstate) Route
AASHTO Use
Only
I-22
Establishment of a U.S. (Interstate) Route
Extension of a U.S. (Interstate)Route
Action taken by SCOH:
Relocation of a U.S. (Interstate) Route
Establishment of a U.S. Alternate Route
Establishment of a Temporary U.S. Route
**Recognition of a Business Route on U.S. (Interstate)
Route
**Recognition of a By-Pass Route on U.S. Route
Between Future I-269
and Alabama State Line
The following states or states are involved:
Mississippi



**“Recognition of…”A local vicinity map needed on page 3. On page 6 a short statement to the effect
that there are no deficiencies on proposed routing, if true, will suffice.
If there are deficiencies, they should be indicated in accordance with page 5 instructions.
All applications requesting Interstate establishment or changes are subject to concurrence and
approval by the FHWA
DATE SUBMITTED: March 30, 2015
SUBMIT APPLICATION ELECTRONICALLY TO [email protected]

*Bike Routes: this form is not applicable for US Bicycle Route System
The purpose of the United States (U.S.) Numbered Highway System is to facilitate travel on the main interstate
highways, over the shortest routes and the best available roads. A route should form continuity of available facilities
through two or more states that accommodate the most important and heaviest motor traffic flow in the area.
The routes comprising the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways will be marked with its own distinctive
route marker shield and will have a numbering system that is separate and apart from the U.S. Numbered Highway
System. For the convenience of the motorist, there must be continuity and a uniform pattern of marking and numbering
these Interstate routes without regard to state lines.
The U.S. Numbered System was established in 1926 and the Interstate Numbered System was established in 1956. Both
have reached the period of review, revision, and consolidation. They now need perfecting rather than expansion.
Therefore, any proposed alteration in the established systems should be extremely meritorious and thoroughly, though
concisely, explained in order that the Special Committee on U.S. Route Numbering and the Standing Committee on
Highways of the Association may give prompt and proper consideration to each and every request made by a member
department.
Explanation and Reasons for the Request: (Keep concise and pertinent.)
MDOT requests approval to sign US 78 from future I-269 to the Alabama state Line as I-22. This 106.7 mile
section of roadway meets all interstate standards and will connect to I-22 in Alabama.
Date facility available to traffic Currently available to traffic.
Does the petition propose a new routing over a portion of an existing U.S. Route? yes
If so, where?
The new routing of US 78, proposed Interstate I-22, will begin at future Interstate I-269 in Desoto County,
Mississippi southeasterly for 106.7 miles to the end of the route at the Alabama State Line.
Does the petition propose a new routing over a portion of an existing Interstate Route? no If so, where?
2
Instructions for Preparation of Page 6
Column 1:
Control Points and Mileage. Top of column is one terminus of road. Indicate control points by identical
number as shown on map on page 3. Show mileage between control points in miles and tenths.
Column 2:
Pavement Type.
High type, heavy duty
Intermediate type
Low type, dustless
Not paved
Code
H
I
L (show in red)
N (show in red)
Column 3:
Pavement Condition
Excellent
Good
Fair
Poor
Code
E
G
F (show in red)
P (show in red)
NOTE: In columns 2 and 3, where pavements types and conditions change, the location of the change shall be indicated
by a short horizontal line at the proper place opposite the mileage log and the proper code letter (shown above) shall be
entered in the respective column between the locations so indicated.
Column 4:
Traffic. Indicate average daily traffic volumes in this column. Points of changes in these data to
be indicated by short horizontal lines opposite the appropriate mileage point on the mileage log.
Any existing main line rail crossing that is not separated shall be indicated at the appropriate
mileage point by RXR - black if signalized - red if not protected by signals.
Columns 5 & 6
Pavement Width and Shoulder Width. These columns to be completed by comparing standards
of highway involved with applicable AASHTO standards. Entries that fall to the right of the
tolerance lines (dashed) should be shaded in red. If there are no deficiencies indicate by use of
the word NONE.
Columns 7 & 8
Major Structures. Show in these columns those structures that do not meet AASHTO standards.
Show by horizontal line sufficiently long to indicate percentage of deficiency. Portion on right of
tolerance line shall be shown in red. Indicate length of structure in feet immediately under the line.
Any sub-standard highway underpass structure shall be shown opposite the appropriate mileage
point by the designation LP with the vertical clearance in feet following and shown in red. If there
are no deficiencies indicate by the use of the word NONE.
Column 9:
Vertical Sight Distance. Items to be shown in this column as a horizontal line, the length of
which will indicate the deficiency as determined in accordance with comparisons with comparable
AASHTO standards. Portions of the line past the tolerance line shall be shown in red.
Column 10:
Horizontal Curvature. Curves in excess of AASHTO applicable standards to be shown in this
column by a short horizontal line with degree of curve shown immediately above the line. To be
shown in red.
Column 11
Percent Grades. Show by horizontal lines opposite proper mileage point on mileage log. Show
percent of grade above the line and length of grade in feet immediately below. To be shown in
red.
What follows is an Excel worksheet that you can open by right clicking your mouse and select “Worksheet Object” – you
can then Edit, Open or Convert but you must first unlock the form as show when inserting maps..
5
2
3
Pavement Type
Pavement Condition
Traffic ADT
E
22,000
Control Points and
Mileage
Mileage
1
4
5
6
7
8
9
Pavement
Width
Deficiency
Shoulder
Width
Deficiency
Major Structures
Roadway Width
Deficiency
H - Loading
Deficiency
Vertical Sight
Distance
Deficiency
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
Percent
10 20 30 40
20 40 60 80
10 20 30 40
20 40 60 80
20 40 60 80
CP 2
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
NONE
31.1
Miles
H
E
17,000
CP 3
NONE
H
E
21,000
20
H
NONE
40
CP 4
60
24.7
Miles
CP 5
Miles
H
E
17,000
80
31.7
11
Comparison to Applicable AASHTO Design Standards
0
19.2
Miles
10
100
CP 6
120
140
160
Attach additional sheet here if necessary
Contact Information:
6
Show When In
Excess of Standard
Horizontal
Curvature
Percent
Grade
Degree
Length
Name: Mark McConnell, Deputy Executive Director, Chief Engineer
Telephone Number: 601-359-7004
Email Address: [email protected]
The following description will be provided to the AASHTO Highways Special Committee on U. S. Route
Number (USRN).
Where does the route begin?
Where is it going?
What type of facility is it traveling over?
Explain the direction (north, east, south, and west)
Name the focal point city or cities
Total number of miles the route will cover
Where does it end?
Begin your description here:
The Mississippi portion of future Interstate 22, identified as current route US 78, is currently designated as a
Principal Arterial facility. The roadway extends from the junction of future Interstate I-269 (Control Point 2) in
Desoto County, Mississippi southeasterly for 106.7 miles to the Alabama State Line. The roadway, intersects
MS 4 (Control Point 3) in Holly Springs, MS, then with MS 30 in New Albany, Mississippi (control point 4),
continues through Tupelo, MS where it intersects with US 45 (control point 5), and ends at the Alabama State
Line (control point 6). The entire portion of roadway meets interstate standards.
7
PUBLIC LAW 108–199—JAN. 23, 2004
118 STAT. 293
in subsection (a)(4) shall remain available until used and shall
be in addition to the amount of any limitation imposed on obligations for Federal-aid highway and highway safety construction programs for future fiscal years.
(g) Of the obligation authority distributed to a State under
subsection (a)(6), an amount of obligation authority equal to the
amount for each surface transportation project in such State identified in section 115 of the statement of managers accompanying
this Act shall be available for carrying out each project.
(h) The obligation limitation made available for the programs,
projects, and activities for which funds are made available under
the heading ‘‘Federal-Aid Highways, Miscellaneous Highway and
Highway Safety Program’’ of this Act shall remain available until
used and shall be in addition to the amount of any limitation
imposed on obligations for Federal-aid highway and highway safety
construction programs for future fiscal years.
SEC. 111. Notwithstanding any other provision of law:
(1) Section 1105(c) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 112 Stat. 191;
115 Stat. 871) is amended—
(A) in paragraph (42), by striking ‘‘Fulton, Mississippi,’’
the first time that it appears and all that follows to the
end of the paragraph and inserting ‘‘Fulton, Mississippi.’’;
and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
‘‘(45) The United States Route 78 Corridor from Memphis,
Tennessee, to Corridor X of the Appalachian development highway system near Fulton, Mississippi, and Corridor X of the
Appalachian development highway system extending from near
Fulton, Mississippi, to near Birmingham, Alabama.’’.
(2) Section 1105(e)(5) of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (105 Stat. 2032; 115 Stat. 872)
is amended—
(A) in subparagraph (A) by striking ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—
The portions’’ and all that follows through the end of the
first sentence and inserting:
‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—The portions of the routes referred
to in subsection (c)(1), subsection (c)(3) (relating solely to
the Kentucky Corridor), clauses (i), (ii), and (except with
respect to Georgetown County) (iii) of subsection (c)(5)(B),
subsection (c)(9), subsections (c)(18) and (c)(20), subsection
(c)(36), subsection (c)(37), subsection (c)(40), subsection
(c)(42), and subsection (c)(45) that are not a part of the
Interstate System are designated as future parts of the
Interstate System.’’; and
(B) by adding the following at the end of subparagraph
(B)(i): ‘‘The route referred to in subsection (c)(45) is designated as Interstate Route I–22.’’.
SEC. 112. Notwithstanding any other provision of law, in section
1602 of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21st Century:
(1) Item number 230 is amended by striking ‘‘Monroe
County transportation improvements on Long Pond Road,
Pattonwood Road, and Lyell road’’ and inserting ‘‘Route 531/
Brockport-Rochester Corridor in Monroe County, New York’’.
(2) Item number 1149 is amended by striking ‘‘Traffic Mitigation Project on William Street and Losson Road in
Cheektowaga’’ and inserting ‘‘Study and implement mitigation
VerDate 11-MAY-2000
11:40 Feb 19, 2004
Jkt 029139
PO 00199
Frm 00291
Fmt 6580
Sfmt 6581
E:\PUBLAW\PUBL199.108
112 Stat. 256.
APPS10
PsN: PUBL199
o
US.Department
Office of the Administrator
of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE
Washington, D.C. 20590
Federal Highway
Administration
November 26, 2012
In Reply Refer To:
HEPH-20
Melinda L. McGrath, P.E.
Through: Mr. Andrew H. Hughes
Executive Director
Division Administrator
Jackson. MS
Mississippi Department of Transportation
P.O.Box 1850
Jackson, MS 39205-1850
Dear Ms. McGrath:
wild*'
Thank you for your letter requesting that U.S. 78 from U.S. 45 to the Mississippi/Alabama State
Line be added to the Interstate Systemas 1-22. This segment is part of the 1-22 corridor that was
designated a future part of the Interstate System by Section 1105(e)(5) of the Intermodal Surface
Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991, as amended.
Our Mississippi Division Office confirms that the 31.1-mile segmentof U.S. 78 from U.S. 45 to
the Mississippi/Alabama State Line has been completed to Interstate standards and meets a
statutory requirement by planning to connect to an existing Interstate System segment by
October 1, 2037. The 74.9-mile segment of U.S. 78 from future 1-269 to U.S. 45 is projected to
be completed to Interstate standards by December 2018, connecting the remainder of the
proposed route to the existing System. I find the requirements of Section 1105(e)(5)(A) have
been satisfied and hereby approve the addition of the 31.1-mile segment to the Interstate System
as follows:
1-22 from U.S. 45 to the Mississippi/Alabama State Line
Upon completion to Interstate standards of U.S. 78 from 1-269 to U.S. 45, the 74.9-mile
segment will be eligible for addition to the Interstate System under the provisions of
Section 1105(e)(5)(A).
Section 1105(e)(5)(C)(i) established the route numbering of this future Interstate corridor as 1-22.
This segment will become eligible for Mississippi's remaining Interstate Maintenance funds for
their specified period of availability.
Sincerely,
Victor M. Mendez
Administrator
cc: Marty Vitale (AASHTO)