Page 1 of 77

TENNESSEE

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 77

Table of Contents

Table of Contents.................................................................................................................................................... 2

Disclaimer............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary................................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction............................................................................................................................................................. 7

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 7

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 7

Program Methodology ...................................................................................................................................... 13

Project Implementation......................................................................................................................................... 23

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 23

General Listing of Projects............................................................................................................................... 25

Safety Performance............................................................................................................................................... 46

General Highway Safety Trends....................................................................................................................... 46

Safety Performance Targets.............................................................................................................................. 59

Applicability of Special Rules.......................................................................................................................... 63

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 65

Program Effectiveness...................................................................................................................................... 65

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 66

Year 2017.............................................................................................................................................................. 66

Project Effectiveness......................................................................................................................................... 70

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 72
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 77

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section [HSIP], shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or other data.” 

23 U.S.C. 409 states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data 

compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of 

potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings, pursuant to sections 

130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway safety construction improvement 

project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or data.” 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 77

Executive Summary

The Project Safety Office within the Tennessee Department of Transportation Strategic Transportation 

Investments Division (STID) maintains the management and oversight of projects within the HSIP program and 

provides a combination of the following services for the projects:

• Investigation of candidate projects 

• Initiation of safety projects and initiatives 

• Coordination with various stakeholders and other TDOT divisions during project development 

• Provision of construction contracts for letting projects of limited scope that do not require further 

development. 

Since its inception in 2010, STID has developed safety focused projects through various programs and 

initiatives. These projects fall under various programs that have unique data driven qualification criteria based 

on a specific condition to address a specific safety concern. A brief synopsis of each program currently active 

within STID is provided below. A total of 66 projects have been let to construction in 2017 with another 338 

projects currently in some phase of development. A summary of the projects either let to construction from the 

program’s inception to present day or currently under development for each program is also provided below.

TDOT STID Programs

Program Safety Concern Addressed by Program

STID Programs Using 

HSIP Funding

Road Safety Audits 

(RSA)

Addresses a variety of safety concerns for locations experiencing crash rates higher 

than statewide averages.

Roadway Departure 

Action Plan

Addresses segment safety concerns at FHWA identified locations that have 

experienced a high rate of roadway departure crashes.

High-Friction Surface 

Safety Initiative

Addresses safety concerns for horizontal curve locations related to the high rate of 

roadway departure crashes experienced by the location.

Local Road Safety 

Initiative

Addresses a variety of safety concerns for non-interstate and state route segments 

located outside an urban and MPO boundary experiencing crash rates higher than 

statewide averages.

Intersection Action 

Plan

Addresses safety concerns at FHWA identified intersection locations that have 

experience a high number of crashes

Wrong Way Safety Initiative Addresses the potential of wrong way movements at interchange 

intersections at various interchanges

Ramp Queue Program Addresses queueing concerns of ramps spilling back onto the main 

travel lanes of the access control facilities

Pedestrian Road Safety Initiative Addresses safety concerns specific to pedestrian related severe crashes

STID Programs Using State, STP, 

or HSIP Funding

Spot Safety Program Addresses specific safety concerns identified by Regional request and 

approved by the Spot Safety Committee

STID Safety Projects Under Active Programs by Region and Funding Source
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 77

Program

# Projects 

Let 

(2017)

# Projects Currently Under Some 

Phase of Development

Construction Cost of Let 

Projects

STID Programs Using HSIP 

Funding

Region 1 14 68 $6,330,506.43

Region 2 8 72 $1,474,535.02

Region 3 10 86 $4,348,673.15

Region 4 12 53 $3,544,345.15

1Statewide 0 3 N/A

Subtotal 44 282 $15,698,059.75

STID Programs Using State, 

STP, or HSIP Funding

Region 1 14 23 $10,366,377.54

Region 2 1 10 $418,101.30

Region 3 3 11 $2,657,547.12

Program

# Projects 

Let 

(2017)

# Projects Currently Under Some Phase of 

Development

Construction Cost of Let 

Projects

Region 4 4 12 $1,792,121.13

Subtotal 22 56 $15,234,147.09

All STID 

Programs

Total 66 338 $30,932,206.84

1 The Wrong Way Safety Initiative and Pedestrian Road Safety Initiative are single projects that encompass 

multiple locations statewide.

STID Safety Projects by Active Program and Funding Source

Program

# Projects 

Let

(2017)

# Projects Currently Under Some Phase 

of Development

Construction Cost of Let 

Projects

STID Programs Using 

HSIP Funding

Road Safety Audits (RSA) 41 144 $14,123,855.10

Roadway Departure Action 

Plan 1 1 $781,015.65

High-Friction Surface 

Safety Initiative 2 1 $255,254.00

Local Road Safety Initiative 0 82 $0.00
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 77

Intersection Action Plan 0 23 $0.00

Wrong Way Safety 

Initiative 0 1 N/A

Ramp Queue Program 0 12 $0.00

Pedestrian Road Safety 

Initiative

Spot Safety Program

0

1

1

16

N/A

$537,935.00

Subtotal 45 281 $15,698,059.75

Program

# Projects 

Let

(2017)

# Projects Currently Under Some 

Phase of Development

Construction Cost of Let 

Projects

STID Programs Using State, 

STP, or HSIP Funding

Spot Safety Program

RSA

14

8

35

24

$10,806,931.66

4,427,215.43

Subtotal 22 57 $15,234,147.09

All STID Programs

Total 66 338 $30,932,206.84

1 The Wrong Way Safety Initiative and Pedestrian Road Safety Initiative are single projects that encompass 

multiple locations statewide.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 77

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation and 

evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 

29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

Strategic Transportation Investments Division 

Programs and Initiatives

Road Safety Audits (RSA)

Addresses a variety of safety concerns for locations experiencing crash rates higher than statewide averages. 

Qualifying criteria for RSA’s applies to: 

All functionally classified public roads

Segments - Spot, Section, or Corridor

Analysis Period: three (3) years 

Length: 

Minimum number of crashes: five(5)

All functionally classified public roads

One (1) fatal or incapacitating injury crash and ratio of severe crash rate > 1.0, Or at least 25% lane departure 

type crashes

Intersections

Non-signalized (rural or urban)

One (1) fatal crash, or two (2) or more incapacitating crashes, or one (1) incapacitating pedestrian or bicycle 

crash

Signalized (rural or urban)

One (1) fatal crash, or one (1) incapacitating pedestrian or bicycle crash

Non-signalized Rural Collector or Rural Local Only

One (1) fatal and/or one (1) incapacitating injury crash

Three (3) or more crashes, or

Five (5) or more crashes with 50% other than rear end crashes

Non-signalized (Urban only)

Fifteen (15) or more crashes with 50% other than rear end crashes

Signalized
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 77

One (1) or more incapacitating angle crashes, or urban, twenty-four (24) or more crashes with 50% other than 

rear end crashes, or rural, seven (7) or more crashes with 50% other than rear end crashes

Roadway Departure Action Plan

Addresses segment safety concerns at FHWA identified locations that have experienced a high rate of 

roadway departure crashes.

Qualifying criteria:

The locations included in the RDAP were provided by FHWA and were based on crash data from the early 

2000’s. Qualification of the location was based on the number of roadway departure crashes experienced 

within the identified segments, regardless of severity.

High-Friction Surface Safety Initiative

Addresses safety concerns for horizontal curve locations related to the high rate of roadway departure crashes 

experienced by the location.

Qualifying criteria: 

Based on crash history of four (4) contiguous years. To qualify, the identified horizontal curve must have 

experienced four (4) or more lane departure related crashes within the time period analyzed.

Local Road Safety Initiative

Addresses a variety of safety concerns for non-interstate and state route segments located outside an urban 

and MPO boundary experiencing crash rates higher than statewide averages.

Qualifying criteria:

The location cannot exist within the area represented by a MPO or an urban boundary.

The location must experience a minimum of five (5) crashes with at least one (1) of the crashes classified as a 

severe crash (incapacitating injury crash or fatal crash). 

The location’s calculated severe crash rate must equal or exceed the statewide average severe crash rate for 

similar facilities. 

Intersection Action Plan

Addresses safety concerns at FHWA identified intersection locations that have experience a high number of 

crashes

Qualifying criteria:

A candidate intersection qualifies for inclusive in the IAP if it is an un-signalized intersection that has 

experienced four (4) or more crashes during the three (3) year period analyzed. During the IAP development 

process, intersection locations were reviewed to determine if the intersection had been signalized and that the 

number of crashes at the location over the most recent three (3) year period met or exceeded the criteria 

threshold of four (4) crashes. 

Wrong Way Safety Initiative

Addresses the potential of wrong way movements at interchange intersections at various interchanges
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 77

Qualifying Criteria:

All locations considered for this program are interchange intersection locations identified by TDOT Regional 

Traffic Offices. The selection criteria used for determination of including a location are provided below. WWSI 

Qualification Criteria · Partial Cloverleaf Interchanges – known crash history involving wrong way movements. · 

Non-Partial Cloverleaf Interchanges – identification by TDOT staff as problematic locations experiencing wrong 

way movements onto the ramps.

Ramp Queue Program

Addresses queueing concerns of ramps spilling back onto the main travel lanes of the access control facilities

Qualifying criteria:

Potential ramp queue candidate projects originate from notification of queues at ramp locations made by TDOT 

Headquarter and Region personnel (either randomly or through TDOT’s Annual Queue Inspection), public 

agencies, and the traveling public. For the location to qualify for the Ramp Queue Program, photographic 

evidence of the ramp’s queue spilling back into the main travel lanes of the access controlled facility must be 

obtained by TDOT or provided by others to TDOT. It should be noted that crash related criteria is not 

associated with qualification. 

Pedestrian Road Safety Initiative

Addresses safety concerns specific to pedestrian related severe crashes

Qualifying criteria:

Qualification of a location for this program was based on historic crash data from 2013 to 2015. For inclusion 

into the program, a location must meet one (1) of the two (2) criteria provided below:

Ten (10) or more identified severe pedestrian crashes within a one (1) mile segment.

Three (3) or more identified severe pedestrian crashes occurring at an intersection.

Spot Safety Program

Addresses specific safety concerns identified by Regional request and approved by the Spot Safety Committee

Qualifying Criteria:

Candidate projects identified by a Spot Safety Request from the Regional Traffic Engineers (RTE’s) are 

evaluated on a case by case basis. All requests are presented to a Spot Safety Committee for initial approval. 

The projects initially approved by the committee must then receive final approval by the Chief Engineer prior to 

inclusion into the Spot Safety Program.

Crash related statistical data is the driving force behind the qualification of project locations for the majority of 

programs. Safety data related tasks and activities are performed by the Safety Data Section within STID. The 

primary function of the Safety Data Section are to analyze crash data to determine if a candidate location 

meets criteria for inclusion in a STID program. Additionally, the Safety Data Section processes the crash data 

transfers from the Department of Safety and Homeland Security’s Tennessee Integrated Traffic Analysis 

Network (TITAN) database into TRIMS (Tennessee Roadway Inventory Management System).

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 77

 Engineering

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The HSIP program at the Tennessee Dept. of Transportation is administered by the Project Safety Office in the 

Strategic Transportation Investments Division. The Project Safety Office is staffed with a Transportation 

Manager overseeing a project safety manager and staff for each of Tennessee's 4 regions. Additionally there is 

a safety data manager and staff responsible for crash data processing and crash location analysis.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

HSIP funds are allocated by data driven identification of roadway locations experiencing higher than normal 

crash activity and the type of activity (roadway departure, intersection, roadway friction, or wrong way drivers) 

aligns with the State's Strategic Highway Safety Plan.

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.

The purpose of the Local Road Safety Initiative (LRSI) is to identify and address safety concerns on local nonstate route segments located outside of an urban boundary and are not represented by Tennessee 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO’s). Routes considered under this program are classified as rural 

major collectors, rural minor collectors, or rural local routes. All candidate locations for this program are

selected using a data driven process with set qualification criteria. The LRSI was originally initiated by TDOT 

Traffic Operations Division. STID assumed oversight of the program in 2015, including projects currently under 

development. 83 counties are eligible for LRSI. All routes are identified by the TDOT Project Safety Office and 

are presented to local stakeholders based on severity. Each county receives up to $300,000 construction cost 

improvements.

Criteria used for LRSI:

Most current 6 years of crash data

1 Fatal or 1 Incapacitating minimum

Total Crashes > 5

Severe crash rate > statewide average severe crash rate

Crash rate > statewide average crash rate

Identify which internal partners (e.g., State departments of transportation (DOTs) Bureaus, Divisions) 

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 77

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Districts/Regions

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with internal partners.

The Strategic Transportation Investments Division Project Safety Office (PSO) works with:

• Design - to coordinate projects that may involve work outside the existing right of way and when 

implementing safety countermeasures that require a design component. 

• Districts/Regions - TDOT is divided into 4 regional offices. The PSO involves each region when an 

HSIP project is being developed in their region. 

• Traffic/Engineering & Operations - Coordinate and implement projects when signals and/or operations 

countermeasures are part of an HSIP project. 

• Planning - The Office of Community Transportation (OCT) for projects that are within an MPO/TPO and 

any rural planning organizations. 

• Maintenance - HSIP funding is used for implementing low cost safety improvements in coordination 

with resurfacing operations. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

Regional Planning Organizations (e.g. MPOs, RPOs, COGs)

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Technical Assistance Program

Local Government Agency 

Law Enforcement Agency

Academia/University

FHWA

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe coordination with external partners.

The Strategic Transportation Investments Division Project Safety Office (PSO) works with:

Academia/University - Assists with research projects to further develop and implement the Highway Safety 

Manual (HSM) for statewide development of Crash Modification Factors (CMF's).

FHWA - Assists with all projects that qualify for HSIP funding and oversight of the Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan (SHSP).
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 77

Tennessee Highway Safety Office - Work with to address driver behavior emphasis area of the SHSP.

Law Enforcement Agencies - Critical stakeholder of all HSIP programs. Works closely with TDOT to maintain 

quality crash data through Tennessee Integrated Traffic Analysis Network (TITAN).

Local Government Agencies - Critical stakeholder of all HSIP projects that involve a locally owned or 

maintained facility.

Regional Planning Organizations - Critical stakeholder of all HSIP programs. Tennessee has 11 Metropolitan 

Planning Organizations (MPO's) and 12 Rural Planning Organizations (RPO's). The Project Safety Office 

coordinates safety projects with these organizations when a project location falls within their jurisdiction. 

The Strategic Highway Safety Plan brings together TDOT, FHWA, TN Dept. of Safety and Homeland Security, 

TN Highway Patrol, TN Highway Safety Office, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, MPO's, TN 

Regional Safety Council, TN Transportation Assistance Program, and the American Automobile Association 

(AAA). The emphasis areas in the SHSP are directly addressed with projects developed in the HSIP program. 

The Strategic Highway Safety Plan Committee meets quarterly.

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

No

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate. 

Tennessee has several noteworthy practices:

1. The Road Safety Audit report is written with enough detail that the report itself is used as the construction 

plans when the project is bid out for contract. These are called “no plans contracts”.

2. Several safety projects are bundled together and let as one safety project. This allows TDOT to award 

several projects for construction at one time and receive better bid prices on the safety projects.

3. The Local Roads Safety Initiative targets safety projects on local roads in rural counties that have limited 

access to resources, only counties, or sections of counties, not represented by a MPO. The entire project, from 

road safety audit review to construction, is completed by TDOT.

4. Since 2008, HSIP funds have been used on safety improvements for resurfacing projects. Safety 

improvements include rumble strips/stripes, guardrail, shoulder widening, and the use of the Safety Edge.

5. In order to identify crash data on local roads, TDOT updated the Tennessee Roadway Identification 

Management System (TRIMS) to include local roadway data elements. This project was completed in April 

2012.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 77

6. The Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security and the Tennessee Department of 

Transportation opened the first of its kind training facility in October 2014. The Tennessee Traffic Incident 

Management (TIM) Training Facility will be used to teach best practices for safe, quick clearance of major 

highway incidents.

7. In June 2013, the Protect the Queue campaign was started. This campaign stresses to all TDOT employees 

and partnering agencies the importance of protecting drivers caught in a traffic queue. A training program on 

the most effective queue management techniques was launched. Since the campaign started, from July 2013 

to December 2013 showed a 19% reduction in secondary incidents over the same period in 2012. This 

equates into 20 fewer secondary incidents, and could possibly represent up to four (4) lives saved. TDOT’s 12 

districts dispatch specially equipped “Protect the Queue” (PTQ) trucks when advised of non-recurring traffic 

queues caused by construction,maintenance, special events, or roadway incidents.

8. The Highway Safety Improvement Program Evaluation Project received a 2017 National Roadway Safety 

Award.

Program Methodology

Does the State have an HSIP manual or similar that clearly describes HSIP planning, implementation 

and evaluation processes?

Yes

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

STID Program Description 082417.pdf

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Intersection

Roadway Departure

Local Safety

Pedestrian Safety

Wrong Way Driving

Other-Ramp Queue

Other-High-friction Surface Safety Initiative

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Program: Intersection 

Date of Program Methodology: 5/1/2015 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 77

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic 

Volume Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria for the IAP.

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Ranking based on severity. : 2

Program: Local Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 3/1/2016 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 77

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

Lane miles 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria for the LRSI program.

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Based on severity : 2
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 77

Program: Pedestrian Safety 

Date of Program Methodology: 2/6/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-pedestrian crashes Traffic 

Volume 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria for the PRSI program. 

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 77

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 5/1/2010 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes Traffic 

Volume 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria for the RDAP program.

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 77

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Ranking based on severity : 2

Program: Wrong Way Driving 

Date of Program Methodology: 7/21/2015 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Other-Wrong way crashes 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Probability of specific crash types

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 77

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Ranked based on severity. : 2

Program: Other-Ramp Queue 

Date of Program Methodology: 11/1/2008 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Other-The intent of this program is 

to identiify locations where the 

queue extends onto the mainline. 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-As projects are identified.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 77

Other-Projects are identified by TDOT Regional Traffic Engineers.

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Ramp queue projects are initiated when it is verified by the Regional Traffic Engineer the ramp queue 

backs up onto the mainline on the interstate. : 2

Program: Other-High-friction Surface Safety 

Initiative 

Date of Program Methodology: 5/14/2013 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

FHWA focused approach to safety

Other-EDC 2 Initiative

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Other-Lane Departure 

Traffic 

Volume 

Horizontal curvature 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 77

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-The projects are developed for all locations that meet the criteria for the HSSI program.

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 1

Other-Number of Crashes : 2

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 30

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Rumble Strips

Install/Improve Signing

Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation

Horizontal curve signs

High friction surface treatment

Wrong way driving treatments

Other-Stop controlled intersections

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Crash data analysis

Other-Road Safety audit Review

High friction surface treatment

Wrong way driving treatments

Other-Stop controlled intersections

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 77

TDOT is currently working toward implementing Highway Safety Manual methods.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

Describe how the State HSIP considers connected vehicles and ITS technologies. 

National initiative: Tennessee to meet the requirements for 25 CVI (Connected Vehicle Intersections) by 2020. 

Actively deploying integrated corridor from Nashville to Murfreesboro to include Interstate 24, State Route 1, 

and connecting arterials.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

For the past 2 years TDOT has been working to understand and adopt Highway Safety Manual processes. 

TDOT has attended peer exchanges in an effort to understand how other states are implementing the HSM.

TDOT has a research project underway with the University of Tennessee and Tennessee State University to 

develop SPF's.

TDOT used the Highway Safety Manual to evaluate previously completed HSIP projects.

TDOT plans to develop an HSM Implementation Plan over the next year.

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

Yes

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

When considering crashes for HSIP qualification criteria, DUI/Drugs, cited drivers, or crashes with animals are 

not considered.

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 77

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

State Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $52,029,909 $40,177,774 77.22%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $8,073,575 $5,408,563 66.99%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $40,401 $35,579 88.06%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$3,329,879 $3,329,879 100%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $63,473,764 $48,951,795 77.12%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) or tribal safety projects?

$3,751,144

How much funding is obligated to local or tribal safety projects?

$3,751,144

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This is the funding for non-state route safety projects.

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$39,866

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 77

$39,866

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

$0

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future.

None

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

No
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 77

General Listing of Projects

List the projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period.

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HRRR/HSIP136(14)Roadway 5.72 Miles $3552.28 $3946.19 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

5,080 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP2723(10)Roadway 1.52 Miles $44130 $44700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Collector

1,780 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP353(10)Roadway 0.2 Miles $1175858 $1306509 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

670 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP5100(30)Roadway 0 Miles $63388.23 $63391.02 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Spot Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP74(10)Roadway 3.48 Miles $1290.09 $1272.74 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,650 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP8100(13)Roadway 0 Miles $2959.12 $2832.7 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Spot Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR/HSIP947(2)Roadway 3.22 Miles $1694.23 $1643.19 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

1,780 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR-6600(23) Roadway 0.812 Miles $11316.32 $10917.79 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

0 Spot Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HRRR-9000(47) Roadway 1.69 Miles $16557.48 $14566.03 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP/STP-H115(47)Roadway 0.02 Miles $171894.02 $190995 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

50,970 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP/STP-H-NH99(43)Roadway 0.2 Miles $60000 $66667 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

17,770 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-1(304) Roadway 4.54 Miles $3621.07 $3621.07 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,580 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-1(343) Roadway 0.1 Miles $4285.68 $4761.87 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-1(351) Roadway 1.3 Miles $45000 $50000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

20,320 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-1(378) Roadway 0.04 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,640 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-1(380) Roadway 6.06 Miles $52650 $58500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,840 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-1(385) Roadway 6.7 Miles $25599 $25599 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-1(387) Roadway 0.01 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

6,530 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-10(68) Roadway 2.895 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,090 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-100(70) Roadway 1.67 Miles $44250 $44500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,670 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-101(25) Roadway 9.12 Miles $189482 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,800 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-104(38) Roadway 7.5 Miles $54517 $54517 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

860 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-106(33) Roadway 0.01 Miles $1923155 $2323431 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

8,530 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-107(25) Roadway 11.34 Miles $160200 $160200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,920 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-108(101) Roadway 2.98 Miles $48153 $48153 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,350 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-108(99) Roadway 4.3 Miles $123903 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,090 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-11(71) Roadway 0.55 Miles $159300 $177000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,220 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-11(93) Roadway 0.1 Miles $132505 $147227 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,220 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-111(104) Roadway 0.49 Miles $12600 $14000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,730 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-118(11) Roadway 0.3 Miles $36810 $40900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,790 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-12(56) Roadway 8.3 Miles $17750 $17750 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,470 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-13(68) Roadway 6.47 Miles $950.38 $950.38 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

710 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-13(75) Roadway 6.41 Miles $31073 $31073 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,880 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-131(46) Roadway 7.53 Miles $219661.65 $-5338.35 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,060 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-131(49) Roadway 6.68 Miles $93780 $104200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

10,620 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-133(10) Roadway 11.43 Miles $11721.33 $11721.33 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

400 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-1341(10) Roadway 2.51 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,800 30 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-135(18) Roadway 0.01 Miles $82800 $92000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

11,200 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-135(19) Roadway 3.79 Miles $9198.04 $8919.03 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,500 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-136(13) Roadway 9.21 Miles $26607.1 $24907.6 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,180 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-1365(4) Roadway 0.924 Miles $18250 $18500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,860 35 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-14(60) Roadway 0.01 Miles $310.68 $345.2 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

7,140 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-141(32) Roadway 5.97 Miles $76661 $76661 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,510 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-15(188) Roadway 1 Miles $48600 $54000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,440 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-15(190) Roadway 7.56 Miles $4500 $5000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

8,620 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-154(7) Roadway 7.23 Miles $32858 $32858 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

980 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-155(28) Roadway 0.17 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

57,850 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-1588(10) Roadway 3.86 Miles $2250 $2500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

1,080 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-162(11) Roadway 0.6 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

59,590 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-166(19) Roadway 9.97 Miles $183945 $183945 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,190 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-167(7) Roadway 7.04 Miles $178500 $178500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,460 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-1700(21) Roadway 7.769 Miles $85354.6 $85368.96 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

560 0 County Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-177(34) Roadway 0.53 Miles $152100 $169000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

36,670 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-193(10) Roadway 8.51 Miles $1328.42 $1328.42 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,910 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-194(14) Roadway 6 Miles $64860 $72066 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

4,850 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-197(12) Roadway 10.29 Miles $63864 $63864 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

670 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-2(228) Roadway 0.01 Miles $99900 $111000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

12,080 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-2(246) Roadway 3.68 Miles $5672.72 $6303.02 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,030 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-20(70) Roadway 7.78 Miles $25254 $25254 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,060 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-206(12) Roadway 0.2 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,460 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-21(17) Roadway 7.94 Miles $2648.41 $2942.68 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,610 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-21(26) Roadway 7.63 Miles $115817 $128686 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,510 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-22(84) Roadway 9.06 Miles $3966.87 $3966.87 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

7,330 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-22(87) Roadway 3.63 Miles $180760 $200844 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

12,010 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-22(88) Roadway 0.43 Miles $90300 $90300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,300 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-228(21) Roadway 6.1 Miles $325286 $361429 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

400 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-23(11) Roadway 0.17 Miles $108562 $120625 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

30,620 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-2300(35) Roadway 2.48 Miles $70170 $70300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Collector

540 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-235(11) Roadway 8.14 Miles $63124 $63124 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,910 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-246(5) Roadway 7.99 Miles $184452 $184952 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,640 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-247(15) Roadway 5.73 Miles $56957 $56957 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,010 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-247(16) Roadway 2.2 Miles $6709 $6709 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,150 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-25(48) Roadway 4.3 Miles $21240 $23600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

10,460 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-252(13) Roadway 1.82 Miles $77400 $86000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,780 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-254(11) Roadway 1.69 Miles $22151 $24612 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

18,400 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-259(3) Roadway 12.88 Miles $846.9 $846.9 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,010 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-26(59) Roadway 0.01 Miles $211977 $235529 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,110 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-26(61) Roadway 0.01 Miles $8995 $8995 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,900 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-262(12) Roadway 4.7 Miles $3820 $3820 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,200 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-264(11) Roadway 4.53 Miles $70354 $70354 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

520 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-265(16) Roadway 2.72 Miles $1306.77 $1306.77 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,430 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-265(17) Roadway 0.02 Miles $2875.9 $3195.44 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

4,020 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-267(7) Roadway 10.8 Miles $240333 $240333 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

790 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-269(29) Roadway 4.99 Miles $4410.73 $4410.73 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

540 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-270(13) Roadway 6.4 Miles $81764.82 $81764.82 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,330 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-28(56) Roadway 12.58 Miles $17985 $19983 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

1,620 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-28(57) Roadway 3.67 Miles $47046 $47046 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

1,760 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-28(62) Roadway 7.45 Miles $269053 $46000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

5,120 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-280(11) Roadway 10.6 Miles $248769 $16500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,420 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-2814(5) Roadway 0.2 Miles $145800 $159200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

11,640 40 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-2823(5) Roadway 0.01 Miles $247500 $275000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,440 50 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-287(11) Roadway 4.85 Miles $63705 $8000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,740 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-287(12) Roadway 6.56 Miles $107085 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,120 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-2870(4) Roadway 1.15 Miles $2946.84 $2169.5 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,330 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-29(104) Roadway 6.1 Miles $101910 $101910 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

7,840 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-29(95) Roadway 3.88 Miles $8428.03 $7928.03 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

3,750 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-2900(18) Roadway 5.8 Miles $10350 $11500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

260 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-297(12) Roadway 8.79 Miles $274758 $274758 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

980 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-298(13) Roadway 2.14 Miles $12828.7 $14254.11 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

7,160 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3(127) Roadway 6.2 Miles $37348.98 $37348.98 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

11,300 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3(140) Roadway 4.46 Miles $4215.22 $4215.22 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,830 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3(150) Roadway 1 Miles $54000 $60000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

19,820 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3053(2) Roadway 3.64 Miles $72587 $72587 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

2,610 40 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-306(11) Roadway 8.58 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,470 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-307(14) Roadway 3.89 Miles $7200 $8000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,270 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-308(7) Roadway 0.01 Miles $51465 $51465 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

4,900 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-308(8) Roadway 0.07 Miles $9000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

4,900 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-31(15) Roadway 2.74 Miles $41000 $41000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,320 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-31(16) Roadway 1.62 Miles $18900 $18900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,320 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-32(85) Roadway 0.43 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

19,830 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-32(86) Roadway 0.45 Miles $44100 $49000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

23,160 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-32(92) Roadway 0.63 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

15,920 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-320(8) Roadway 2.11 Miles $2250 $2500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

19,580 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3203(3) Roadway 1.38 Miles $35776 $36276 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,770 35 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-322(18) Roadway 8.94 Miles $20700 $20700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,570 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-323(22) Roadway 2.14 Miles $11200 $11200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,890 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-33(102) Roadway 0.57 Miles $1120770 $1245300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

13,260 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-33(118) Roadway 0.01 Miles $2235600 $2484000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

18,770 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-33(121) Roadway 0.5 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

14,990 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-33(96) Roadway 1.11 Miles $297540 $330600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

17,830 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-331(8) Roadway 5.26 Miles $99400 $99400 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,360 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-336(15) Roadway 7.7 Miles $209000 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

740 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-339(8) Roadway 5.74 Miles $1046700 $1163000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,110 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(100) Roadway 0.01 Miles $86490 $96100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

21,410 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(101) Roadway 2.73 Miles $17366.29 $19295.88 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

21,410 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(103) Roadway 0.52 Miles $30600 $34000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

12,560 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(104) Roadway 0.5 Miles $74250 $82500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

23,540 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(105) Roadway 0.01 Miles $72000 $80000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

22,120 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-34(109) Roadway 0.4 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

25,140 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-34(90) Roadway 0.01 Miles $812160 $902400 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

18,960 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-347(11) Roadway 10.99 Miles $591000 $591000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

320 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-357(3) Roadway 0.119 Miles $875700 $973000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,070 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-36(59) Roadway 2.03 Miles $73250 $75500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

17,320 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-36(60) Roadway 2.76 Miles $82120 $82800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

10,210 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-36(61) Roadway 0.01 Miles $532530 $591700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

15,130 30 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-36(62) Roadway 1.52 Miles $9000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

17,320 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-36(64) Roadway 0.59 Miles $18250 $18500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

10,210 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-36(65) Roadway 0.12 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

12,600 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-3600(38) Roadway 6.53 Miles $290250 $290500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

1,110 45 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-372(11) Roadway 3.96 Miles $89102 $99002 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

4,190 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-3800(15) Roadway 0 Miles $18190.19 $17216.15 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Spot Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-419(10) Roadway 0.99 Miles $68842 $76491 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

1,780 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-43(42) Roadway 3.86 Miles $68000 $68000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

15,150 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-44(9) Roadway 3.1 Miles $90873 $100970 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,350 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-444(6) Roadway 11.02 Miles $631600 $631600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,140 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-45(28) Roadway 0.06 Miles $30000 $75000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

49,790 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-48(55) Roadway 3.03 Miles $66392 $66892 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,000 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-48(57) Roadway 3.55 Miles $9167 $9167 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,860 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-4900(63) Roadway 8.04 Miles $1211819 $1285682 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

750 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-4965(10) Roadway 0.5 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

8,040 35 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-5(102) Roadway 0.03 Miles $49000 $49000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

16,970 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-5(105) Roadway 0.08 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

10,640 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-5(109) Roadway 6.35 Miles $88000 $88000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,010 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-5(110) Roadway 3.21 Miles $27670 $27670 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,820 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-52(80) Roadway 4.69 Miles $3722.69 $3722.69 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

2,030 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-52(85) Roadway 4.02 Miles $13860 $13860 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,200 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-53(49) Roadway 6.86 Miles $4023.59 $3523.59 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,220 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-5379(10) Roadway 0.01 Miles $61612 $61612 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

8,230 40 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-54(41) Roadway 1.93 Miles $121590 $135100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,800 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-56(85) Roadway 6.21 Miles $61287 $61287 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,680 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-56(86) Roadway 9.02 Miles $95767 $95767 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,670 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-56(87) Roadway 5.39 Miles $19082 $21202 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,840 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-57(70) Roadway 5.07 Miles $191000 $191000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,200 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-60(35) Roadway 3.85 Miles $11277 $11277 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

7,900 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-65(17) Roadway 1.38 Miles $108324 $108824 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,400 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-66(49) Roadway 8.16 Miles $9480.46 $10533.85 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,630 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-67(32) Roadway 0.5 Miles $737317 $1293000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,830 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-68(47) Roadway 2.7 Miles $119058.68 $1458.68 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,390 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-68(48) Roadway 6.83 Miles $239274 $60 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,400 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-68(50) Roadway 2 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,850 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-70(20) Roadway 4.29 Miles $5708.15 $5708.15 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

200 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-70(23) Roadway 6.42 Miles $24900 $24900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,370 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-70(25) Roadway 1.019 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,750 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-71(33) Roadway 0.98 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

29,940 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-73(62) Roadway 4.22 Miles $8550 $9500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,760 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-7500(28) Roadway 2.148 Miles $5917.84 $4988.58 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

4,190 40 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-803(4) Roadway 0.01 Miles $273900 $301000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

11,890 45 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-826(5) Roadway 1 Miles $36000 $40000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

970 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-872(11) Roadway 8.63 Miles $557578 $580911 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

1,730 55 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9(74) Roadway 0.01 Miles $42000 $42000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

4,210 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9(75) Roadway 22.76 Miles $6374.97 $7083.3 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,140 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9(80) Roadway 0.01 Miles $43920 $48800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,090 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-9(82) Roadway 2.78 Miles $193500 $215000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,850 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9(96) Roadway 3.08 Miles $29200 $29200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

5,280 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9000(48) Roadway 1.99 Miles $62770 $64900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Collector

2,570 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-904(10) Roadway 2.3 Miles $5161.2 $4908.16 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

940 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-93(18) Roadway 0.18 Miles $9000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

17,840 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9323(3) Roadway 0.447 Miles $9000 $10000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Local Road 

or Street

0 30 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-9400(59) Roadway 2.376 Miles $7042.39 $6106.83 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Major 

Collector

6,990 40 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-96(40) Roadway 6.5 Miles $39284.95 $39284.95 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

240 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-96(44) Roadway 6.53 Miles $127515.49 $141683.87 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

240 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-96(51) Roadway 2.97 Miles $84601 $8000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

690 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-970(10) Roadway 5.19 Miles $145010 $173647 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,500 45 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-99(44) Roadway 12.07 Miles $9023.09 $8838.95 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

510 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-99(56) Roadway 2.91 Miles $21142 $23491 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,990 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-9900(91) Roadway 0 Miles $35879.61 $39866.24 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-140(17) Roadway 0.01 Miles $98550 $109500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

48,070 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-24-1(105) Roadway 0.01 Miles $789846 $877606 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

153,350 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-24-1(109) Roadway 0.25 Miles $1563701 $1737445 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

165,360 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-24-2(159) Roadway 5.72 Miles $141519 $142019 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

46,700 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-40-3(157) Roadway 0.2 Miles $265050 $294500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

47,080 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

HSIP-I-40-3(165) Roadway 1 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

32,630 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-40-6(162) Roadway 0.703 Miles $964800 $1072000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

35,410 60 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-40-7(172) Roadway 0.272 Miles $39600 $44000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

75,160 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-40-8(168) Roadway 0.7 Miles $108000 $120000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

15,850 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-640-7(172) Roadway 1.43 Miles $56700 $63000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

54,930 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

HSIP-I-65-2(100) Roadway 0.33 Miles $102600 $114000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

184,700 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-75-1(132) Roadway 0.01 Miles $25854.9 $28727.88 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

129,750 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-75-3(168) Roadway 1.07 Miles $14534.42 $16149.36 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

86,230 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-75-3(176) Roadway 5.45 Miles $37890 $42100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

25,600 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-75-3(177) Roadway 0.27 Miles $18000 $20000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

37,320 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-I-81-1(125) Roadway 0.4 Miles $21076.88 $23418.75 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

31,970 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-NH-385(29) Roadway 1.85 Miles $14369.45 $14369.45 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

21,540 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-REG1(87) Roadway 0.1 Miles $1722.4 $1914.22 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,080 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

HSIP-REG4(160) Roadway 0.49 Miles $833567 $835067 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

670 0 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-1(342) Roadway 0.99 Miles $14400 $16000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,020 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-1(379) Roadway 0.37 Miles $26893 $29880 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

13,700 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-1(384) Roadway 6.42 Miles $91655 $101839 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,640 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-10(69) Roadway 6.29 Miles $21996 $24440 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,090 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-10(70) Roadway 7.07 Miles $94374 $104859 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

9,160 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-11(96) Roadway 3.28 Miles $274869 $305410 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

37,780 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-11(97) Roadway 4.33 Miles $73594 $81770 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

17,440 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

NH/HSIP-111(99) Roadway 3.25 Miles $3223.14 $3223.14 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

10,170 60 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-14(64) Roadway 2.85 Miles $17040 $17040 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

1,780 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-15(193) Roadway 3.38 Miles $96089.25 $106765.83 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

3,980 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-15(200) Roadway 1.86 Miles $23592 $23592 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,910 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-15(201) Roadway 1.69 Miles $174870 $194300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,440 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-15(204) Roadway 4.77 Miles $39564 $39564 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

5,550 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-153(9) Roadway 2.02 Miles $1247.91 $1386.01 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

32,140 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-155(26) Roadway 3.02 Miles $3508.23 $3508.23 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

96,370 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-158(10) Roadway 1.725 Miles $40095.29 $40095.29 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

38,730 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-175(24) Roadway 3.57 Miles $67500 $75000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

43,990 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-177(38) Roadway 2.98 Miles $580500 $645000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

44,270 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-2(258) Roadway 1.99 Miles $148278 $164752 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

34,380 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-20(68) Roadway 4.66 Miles $172521 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

15,240 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-254(10) Roadway 2.67 Miles $34356 $38174 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

18,400 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-29(106) Roadway 2.4 Miles $53662 $59625 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

20,900 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

NH/HSIP-29(97) Roadway 3.24 Miles $15690.89 $15690.89 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

5,230 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-32(89) Roadway 2.09 Miles $22500 $22500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

18,660 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-34(110) Roadway 4.04 Miles $139500 $155000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

17,640 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-35(70) Roadway 1.11 Miles $106020 $117800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

16,410 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-366(11) Roadway 3.36 Miles $82800 $92000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

11,660 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-37(21) Roadway 3.05 Miles $88200 $88200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

11,080 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-376(5) Roadway 4.47 Miles $17132 $17132 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

3,840 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-386(21) Roadway 1.89 Miles $17719 $17719 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

65,020 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-386(22) Roadway 0 Miles $23207 $23207 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-40(36) Roadway 4 Miles $28958 $28958 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

3,670 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-431(13) Roadway 0 Miles $111036.82 $123373.46 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-5(98) Roadway 0 Miles $1660.2 $1843.57 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-52(82) Roadway 4.76 Miles $203096 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

12,650 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-55(25) Roadway 3.67 Miles $79012 $79012 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

10,270 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-57(69) Roadway 2.57 Miles $348413 $348413 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

39,140 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-61(41) Roadway 9.24 Miles $23545.6 $23545.6 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

4,550 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

NH/HSIP-61(43) Roadway 3.58 Miles $11519 $11519 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

17,860 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-62(46) Roadway 0 Miles $89000 $89000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-62(47) Roadway 1.15 Miles $32940 $36600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

26,100 30 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-63(63) Roadway 4.4 Miles $15000 $15000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

4,690 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-67(33) Roadway 2.02 Miles $39600 $44000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,820 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-69(95) Roadway 5 Miles $189000 $210000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

5,360 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-7(35) Roadway 3.62 Miles $56585 $62871 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

28,910 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-71(34) Roadway 0.22 Miles $2579.89 $2579.89 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

26,790 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-71(37) Roadway 0.8 Miles $34020 $37800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

33,490 25 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-71(38) Roadway 3.57 Miles $315900 $351000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

49,840 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-73(66) Roadway 8.2 Miles $173777.57 $-23222.43 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

7,960 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-76(103) Roadway 5.87 Miles $56334 $56334 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

6,420 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-76(105) Roadway 3.41 Miles $65692 $65692 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

26,560 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

NH/HSIP-9(95) Roadway 4.62 Miles $236610 $262900 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

32,110 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP/HSIP31(13)Roadway 3.455 Miles $6509.38 $6509.38 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,320 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP/HSIP36(58)Roadway 1.16 Miles $87800 $88000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,980 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

PHSIP/HSIP69(91)Roadway 1.23 Miles $34000 $34000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

9,010 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP/HSIP7300(34)Roadway 0.19 Miles $38180 $39260 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Collector

570 40 County Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP/HSIP-I-40-

3(160)

Roadway 0.1 Miles $292800 $320800 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Interstate

33,930 70 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP/STP-SIP311(30)Roadway 0.01 Miles $103980.6 $129976 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,900 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-1053(3) Roadway 0.37 Miles $782000 $782000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

19,700 30 City of Municipal 

Highway Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP-12(54) Roadway 0.25 Miles $63510.26 $91159.07 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

6,930 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP-168(10) Roadway 0.01 Miles $147773.68 $147773.68 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

10,980 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-2(243) Roadway 0.01 Miles $22500 $22500 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

19,360 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-20(56) Roadway 0.58 Miles $30570.55 $30570.55 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

19,650 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP-24(55) Roadway 0.01 Miles $3437.97 $3437.97 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

29,350 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-3(130) Roadway 0.01 Miles $197431 $197431 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

25,700 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-33(119) Roadway 0.5 Miles $559500 $559500 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

14,990 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

PHSIP-52(71) Roadway 0.18 Miles $39555.7 $39555.7 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

660 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

PHSIP-I-75-3(171) Roadway 0.01 Miles $1609200 $1609200 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Interstate

78,130 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

R-HSIP-305(12) Roadway 2.85 Miles $22500 $25000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

7,460 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

R-HSIP-58(47) Roadway 0.01 Miles $315886 $369043 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,250 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP/HSIP11(72)Roadway 0.02 Miles $2069919.71 $2693658 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

8,250 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-1(329) Roadway 0.01 Miles $485839 $504749 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

12,710 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

R-PHSIP-338(7) Roadway 0.01 Miles $1311000.2 $1391001 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

12,320 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-34(95) Roadway 0.01 Miles $90225 $90225 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

25,620 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-36(55) Roadway 0.01 Miles $563000 $563000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

24,980 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-373(12) Roadway 0.01 Miles $34379.86 $34378.86 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,190 30 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-76(91) Roadway 0.6 Miles $29000 $29000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

18,270 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-9(81) Roadway 0.5 Miles $355200 $444000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

8,890 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

R-PHSIP-96(39) Roadway 0.12 Miles $185000 $185000 Penalty Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

30,740 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

R-STP/HSIP35(65)Roadway 7.15 Miles $23186.52 $23186.52 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

15,490 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

R-STP/HSIP-9(87) Roadway 5.63 Miles $22100 $22100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,550 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-1(334) Roadway 1.95 Miles $1786.66 $1786.66 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,040 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-1(347) Roadway 5.2 Miles $17652.92 $17652.92 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,120 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-1(371) Roadway 2.92 Miles $599738 $361134 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

15,860 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-106(39) Roadway 2.29 Miles $21987.02 $21987.02 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,320 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-106(40) Roadway 0.51 Miles $2103.83 $2103.83 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,320 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-107(27) Roadway 7.3 Miles $69600 $69600 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,660 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP108(100)Roadway 3.34 Miles $9419 $9419 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,060 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-11(89) Roadway 5.3 Miles $190317 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,770 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-11(94) Roadway 5.49 Miles $82149 $91277 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,910 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-11(95) Roadway 11.28 Miles $29878 $29878 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,440 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

STP/HSIP-121(17) Roadway 6.85 Miles $271011 $301123 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,410 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-122(11) Roadway 2.7 Miles $53241 $53241 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,050 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-13(74) Roadway 6.2 Miles $36907 $41007 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,840 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-135(24) Roadway 1.89 Miles $639213 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

25,550 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-139(10) Roadway 5.45 Miles $40500 $40500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,950 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-145(5) Roadway 5.9 Miles $32465 $32465 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

740 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-147(4) Roadway 6.16 Miles $15939 $15939 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

580 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-15(199) Roadway 4.59 Miles $123382 $137091 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

5,490 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-154(6) Roadway 1.38 Miles $21979 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

630 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-160(13) Roadway 3.36 Miles $23520 $23520 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

11,660 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-162(9) Roadway 3.5 Miles $170100 $170100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

44,920 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-164(5) Roadway 5 Miles $14501 $14501 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,110 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-170(12) Roadway 5.55 Miles $811.84 $811.84 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,010 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-177(30) Roadway 1.15 Miles $19590.18 $21767.65 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

44,270 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-178(11) Roadway 4.38 Miles $99804 $110894 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,050 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-19(51) Roadway 2.99 Miles $95546.35 $95546.35 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

2,990 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-194(13) Roadway 9.02 Miles $50853 $50853 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,460 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-2(252) Roadway 3.86 Miles $349140 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

19,360 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-200(39) Roadway 7.79 Miles $209648 $209648 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

700 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-209(15) Roadway 2.85 Miles $8933 $9925 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

3,670 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

STP/HSIP-21(25) Roadway 8.33 Miles $627118 $696798 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,610 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-22(86) Roadway 4.91 Miles $111474 $123860 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

7,920 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-227(8) Roadway 7.51 Miles $49140 $49140 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,570 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-24(68) Roadway 11 Miles $37621 $37621 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,050 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-245(10) Roadway 6.67 Miles $74666 $74666 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

670 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-26(69) Roadway 0.97 Miles $52221 $-48531 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

13,110 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-261(18) Roadway 6.64 Miles $17310 $17310 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,860 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-263(11) Roadway 5.12 Miles $56963 $63292 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

890 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-266(28) Roadway 3.33 Miles $102674 $102674 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

28,440 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-284(12) Roadway 8.24 Miles $12757 $12757 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,030 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-284(13) Roadway 1.57 Miles $2403 $2403 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

870 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-284(14) Roadway 1.89 Miles $2888 $2888 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

170 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-29(105) Roadway 3.28 Miles $1115100 $1239000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other

7,770 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-290(8) Roadway 10.58 Miles $20242 $20242 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

530 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-298(14) Roadway 5.63 Miles $21720 $21720 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,020 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-30(79) Roadway 5.58 Miles $16280 $16280 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,290 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-30(82) Roadway 5.35 Miles $20920 $20920 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

750 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-32(88) Roadway 6.81 Miles $169000 $26000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

5,800 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-322(17) Roadway 3.1 Miles $112500 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

4,770 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-328(10) Roadway 6.45 Miles $47300 $47300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

830 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

STP/HSIP-328(11) Roadway 1.76 Miles $25200 $28000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

1,950 25 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-33(125) Roadway 2.22 Miles $102967.02 $-161032.98 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

15,550 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-339(12) Roadway 1.03 Miles $35850 $5500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,580 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-35(69) Roadway 3.8 Miles $59200 $59200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

16,410 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-351(20) Roadway 6.74 Miles $116500 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,400 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-351(21) Roadway 4.51 Miles $14300 $14300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,320 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-358(12) Roadway 3.47 Miles $96480 $107200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

7,920 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-367(9) Roadway 4.73 Miles $138150 $153500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,950 31 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-400(33) Roadway 4.91 Miles $155700 $155700 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,650 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-43(39) Roadway 10.01 Miles $35000 $35000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

4,540 65 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-438(6) Roadway 6.6 Miles $27078 $27078 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

300 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-48(59) Roadway 2.7 Miles $10369 $10369 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

17,080 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-49(46) Roadway 7.85 Miles $21893 $21893 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

920 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-49(50) Roadway 5.37 Miles $38945 $38945 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

8,840 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-50(60) Roadway 1.74 Miles $100877 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

4,060 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-50(61) Roadway 7.43 Miles $93167 $93167 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,740 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-52(83) Roadway 2.6 Miles $72279 $7000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,760 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-53(50) Roadway 2.28 Miles $110928 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,490 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-54(42) Roadway 5.36 Miles $69300 $69300 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,560 30 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-62(45) Roadway 5.8 Miles $132370 $132370 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,380 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 77

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE SELECTION

EMPHASIS AREA STRATEGY

STP/HSIP-62(48) Roadway 5.12 Miles $27804 $27804 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,380 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-63(64) Roadway 2.63 Miles $144900 $161000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,860 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-68(42) Roadway 7.7 Miles $2896.91 $2896.91 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

3,520 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-68(43) Roadway 4.98 Miles $37740.98 $37740.98 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,810 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-69(96) Roadway 6.16 Miles $70920 $78800 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

680 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-75(18) Roadway 2.42 Miles $43290 $48100 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

11,370 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-76(104) Roadway 2.19 Miles $174600 $194000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

6,480 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-8(51) Roadway 4.17 Miles $77932 $1500 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,360 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-83(11) Roadway 7.83 Miles $74694 $74694 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,850 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-84(12) Roadway 0.12 Miles $22106 $24562 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

2,610 35 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-84(13) Roadway 6.11 Miles $24182 $24182 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

170 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-85(27) Roadway 4.85 Miles $123647 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,240 45 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-85(29) Roadway 8 Miles $16664 $16664 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

1,170 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-9(92) Roadway 2.91 Miles $59600 $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

3,740 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-93(21) Roadway 8.04 Miles $159500 $12200 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

1,880 50 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-96(42) Roadway 5.96 Miles $14024.18 $14024.18 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other

15,230 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/HSIP-96(54) Roadway 4.01 Miles $66511 $73901 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

15,200 40 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP/PHSIP/HSIP10(24)Roadway 1.76 Miles $1170000 $1300000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,350 55 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP-NH/HSIP153(13)Roadway 0 Miles $280548 $311719 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Infrastructure

STP-SIP/H100(62)Roadway 0.01 Miles $1161831 $1446310 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

2,590 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Infrastructure

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 77

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatalities 986 1,032 937 1,014 996 967 962 1,039 1,042

Serious Injuries 6,497 6,655 7,371 7,596 6,925 6,868 7,613 7,595 7,129

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.400 1.470 1.330 1.430 1.400 1.330 1.280 1.351 1.303

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

9.240 9.450 10.420 10.680 9.740 9.470 10.110 9.878 8.911

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

83 94 88 76 94 95 120 110 134

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

319 285 327 303 256 346 385 388 418
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 77

880

900

920

940

960

980

1000

1020

1040

1060

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

5800

6000

6200

6400

6600

6800

7000

7200

7400

7600

7800

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 77

1.15

1.2

1.25

1.3

1.35

1.4

1.45

1.5

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

8

8.5

9

9.5

10

10.5

11

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 77

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and ownership.

Year 2017

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

58 289.4 0.72 3.6

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0.2 2.8 0.17 1.28

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

83.4 382.4 1.54 7.12

Rural Minor Arterial 95.4 595.6 1.92 12.24

Rural Minor Collector 83.2 488.4 2.61 15.79

Rural Major Collector 87.8 508.8 2.39 13.89

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 77

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Local Road or Street 74 559.8 2.31 18.21

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

92.4 463.6 0.79 3.94

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

12.4 61.2 0.47 2.37

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

183 1,565 1.7 14.41

Urban Minor Arterial 118.6 1,072 1.38 12.5

Urban Minor Collector 13.6 94 2.26 16.08

Urban Major Collector 47.6 411.4 1.25 10.31

Urban Local Road or Street 52.6 544.6 0.65 6.65
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 77

Year 2017

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 477.4 3,558.8

County Highway Agency 125.6 1,153

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

93.8 1,187

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

Indian Tribe Nation
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 77

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 77

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

1400

1600

1800

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 77

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 55 of 77

0

5

10

15

20

25

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 56 of 77

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 57 of 77

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 58 of 77

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 59 of 77

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

Yes

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

•

Tennessee Highway Safety Office (THSO) funding is stable; and there are no anticipated changes or 

additional funds available for behavioral/enforcement programs over next two years 

• Distracted driving and speeding are behavioral factors of concern 

• Predictive Crash Software has been expanded to include availability to local law enforcement, such as 

Sheriffs’ Departments and city police 

• Non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries are seeing an increase nationally as well as in Tennessee 

• Tennessee’s population continues to grow; there is an influx of people coming to state as new residents 

plus Tennessee is home to several popular destinations for tourists 

• VMT trend continues upward 

• The number of highway construction work zones across state is anticipated to increase as IMPROVE 

Act projects are implemented 

• Long-term federal funding for transportation is uncertain 

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 60 of 77

Calendar Year 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 1022.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

• Fatality numbers have been relatively stable from 2016 to 2017 after a large increase 

from 2015 to 2016 • Numbers from January 1 thru end of May (6/5/18) are showing 

decline from this time last year; it is still early in the calendar year but early numbers 

are a positive sign • Safety projects continue to be implemented, however, there is a 

lag between the time safety projects are implemented to completion and additional 

time needed for those projects to then have an impact on results • One year of low 

fatalities (963 in 2014) drops from target • “Optimistic but cautious” approach was 

agreed upon after assessing data and factors • The current moving average target is 

higher than 2014-2018 target by 0.06% but projects decreases in fatalities over the 

next two years • Target is based on slight decreases in fatalities for the next two years 

(0.7% for 2018 and 0.5% for 2019). 

Number of Serious Injuries 7374.6 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

• The average rate of change for serious injuries is 1.3% (over past five year period) • 

The actual serious injury number decreased from 2016 to 2017 • Terminology on crash 

reports which law enforcement officers complete has changed (definition is the same

but the terminology has shifted) from “incapacitating injury” to “suspected serious 

injury” in December 2017. It is unclear what impact this may have on serious injuries 

reported. • Reviewed 4-year and 5-year linear trend lines which did not necessarily 

have a good fit but did indicate five year average will continue to increase • The 

serious injury number target is based on an average rate of change of 1.3% per year 

from the 2017 actual number (1.3% increase in 2018 and a 1.3% increase again in 

2019). 

Fatality Rate 1.291 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

• 2017 VMT number was calculated using FHWA Office of Highway Policy (OHPI) 

monthly travel trends volumes • VMT trends over time showed an average increase of 

around 1.1% • Anticipated continued growth in population and travel in state • Fatality 

rate target assumes a 1% increase in VMT per year for both 2018 and 2019 and is 

calculated using projected fatalities for 2018 and 2019 in accordance with fatality 

number target. 

Serious Injury Rate 9.324 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 61 of 77

2017 VMT number was calculated using FHWA Office of Highway Policy (OHPI) 

monthly travel trends volumes • VMT trends over time showed an average increase of 

around 1.1% • Anticipated continued growth in population and travel in state • Serious 

Injury rate target assumes a 1% increase in VMT per year for both 2018 and 2019 and 

is calculated using projected serious injuries for 2018 and 2019 in accordance with 

fatality number target. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 546.8 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

• Numbers continue to trend upward. An increase of 10.5% was seen in Tennessee 

from 2016 to 2017. • The 2014-2018 target estimated a 2.5 % increase per year. • The 

average change increase over past five years was 4.36%. • Preliminary numbers show 

13% (134) of all highway fatalities for 2017 were non-motorized. • Growth in urban 

areas continues causing greater mix of pedestrians and bikes on the roadway system. • 

There is a national trend for higher numbers of fatalities and serious injuries for nonmotorized transportation; reasons for recent rise in pedestrian fatalities have not been 

scientifically determined, however experts suspect distracted driving and walking 

(smartphones) or being under the influence may be key contributors. • Target assumes 

annual increase of 4.36% from 2017 for next two years (increase of 4.36% in 2018 and 

increase of 4.36% in 2019) 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Fatalities 

There was no change in percent of fatalities between CY 2016 and 2017 based on preliminary 2017 numbers. 

Fatality numbers from 2016 to 2017 appear to have remained stable after a significant increase in fatalities 

from 2015 to 2016 (8%). Early 2018 fatality numbers were trending lower than 2017 numbers in a year to date 

comparison as of April 2, 2018.

Three years ( 2013, 2014, and 2015 ) with some of the state’s lowest fatality numbers ( under 1,000 fatalities ) 

are included in Tennessee’s 2013-2017 five-year rolling average baseline; this impacts ability to set a target 

lower than the baseline.

Non-motorist fatalities comprised 11% of total traffic fatalities in Tennessee for CY 2016. Preliminary data, 

indicates that 134 (13%) of the 1,042 traffic fatalities that occurred in TN in 2017 were non-motorist fatalities. 

Non-motorist fatalities have been on the increase nationwide.

Distracted walking is now a concern for cities and states as sharp rise in smartphones to send and receive 

messages is a mental and visual distraction for both walkers and drivers. (Non-motorist fatalities in TN were 

over a 100 for both 2015 and 2016 showing a substantial increase from the previous four years (2011-2014).

Vehicle Miles Travelled 

VMT trend continues upward. Preliminary 2017 VMT numbers indicate that VMT in Tennessee increased from 

4-6%.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 62 of 77

VMT and average monthly temperature had strong positive relationships with number of fatalities meaning 

more fatalities occur when more driving was done, and also when weather was warmer. New passenger 

vehicle registrations also showed a positive correlation with the number of fatalities but not as strong as VMT 

and temperature. Reference 5-year Correlation between Fatalities and Economic and Other Indicators (2011-

2015) chart that was part of a 2015 NHTSA report. 

https://crashstats.nhtsa.dot.gov/Api/Public/ViewPublication/812318

Draft targets set for 2015-2019 anticipate a 1.0% increase in VMT. This was based on average VMT increase 

over recent years along with estimation of population growth of 0.8% a year for next decade as reported in the 

2018 State Economic Outlook Report.

Population and Travel Growth

“For the fourth year in a row, Tennessee saw population growth increasing slightly faster than the national 

average. Tennessee’s population in 2017 was 6.7 million, which was one percent more than in 2016. The 

Nashville metropolitan area continued to see its population grow faster than the rest of the state in 2017. Of the 

state’s 95 counties, a total of 77 experienced growth in their populations. Of the 77 counties, 34 had growth 

rates that exceeded the state average of 1.1% and 45 grew faster than the national average of 0.7%”. – U. T. 

Boyd Center for Business and Research

According to the 2018 Economic Report to the Governor, Tennessee’s population is projected to grow at rate 

of 0.8% per year for the next 10 years keeping pace with national forecast for population growth.

Tennessee experienced 113.6 million person stays in 2017, an increase of 3.3 percent over 2016. Tennessee 

places among the Top 10 travel destinations in the U.S. for the fourth consecutive year and is considered to be 

a top retirement destination.

In 2017, Tennessee had 4,799,881 licensed drivers. This is an increase of approximately 2%from 2016 Twenty 

percent of licensed drivers in Tennessee as of 2016 are senior drivers (65 years or older.) Tennessee's senior 

population as of 2017 is estimated to be 16% of total state population fy the U.S. Census Bureau.

Distracted Driving

Describe efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. MPOs, SHSO) to establish safety performance 

targets. 

A cross-functional, cross-agency working group was identified to develop targets for the 2015-2019 safety 

performance measures. This working group included members of the Tennessee Highway Safety Office 

(THSO), Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security (TDS&HS), Tennessee Division of Federal 

Highway Administration, Knoxville Regional Transportation Planning Organization, Chattanooga-Hamilton 

County Regional Planning Agency, and the Tennessee Department of Transportation. The target setting 

process consisted of data review, trend analysis, context/consideration of key factors, consensus on target 

setting assumptions, and review and consensus on draft targets. The Safety PM Working Group provided 

recommendations to an Oversight Committee, which included directors from TDOT, TDS&HS and THSO. 

Finalized targets were presented to the executive leadership at all agencies for review and approval.

This team examined crash trends from 2003 until 2017 and identified factors related to both the general target 

setting environment and those specific to each measure to determine the 2015-2019 targets. While the fatality 

number target for 2015-2019 shows an increase in fatalities from the 2014-2018 target, the total fatalities per 

year is expected to decrease. However, non-motorized serious injuries and fatalities are expected to increase 
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 63 of 77

over the next two years due to the growth in urban areas and increased bicycle, pedestrian, and other nonmotorized traffic.

All partner agencies are committed to reducing, and eventually eliminating, fatalities and crashes in all 

performance areas. The targets identified are projections of future performance based on historical data and 

influencing factors with a long-term vision of having zero fatalities.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 years of age and 

older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

126 139 157 157 154 172 183

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

559 566 534 528 664 635 652
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 64 of 77

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 65 of 77

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

The Tennessee Department of Transportation (TDOT) Strategic Transportation Investments Division (STID) 

analyzed the effectiveness of constructed safety projects in reducing crash frequency. The analysis was 

conducted in two stages. The first stage examined 261 sites with crash data from three (3) years before and 

three (3) years after implementation of safety improvements as recommended in the site’s safety report. The 

sites include Road Safety Audits and Spot Safety Projects. The phase one analysis was a simple assessment 

to determine if crash frequency increased, decreased, or stayed the same after construction of safety 

countermeasures. The Phase Two Analysis involved a more detailed review of forty-five (45) sites using the 

Highway Safety Manual (HSM) procedures for estimating crash frequency with and without implementation of 

safety countermeasures. The Phase Two Analysis was conducted to examine in detail the specific types of 

countermeasures implemented and their effectiveness in reducing crashes. The Phase One Analysis suggests 

that the TDOT safety program overall has been successful in reducing crash frequency since sixty percent 

(60%) of sites had some level of crash reduction. How much reduction is attributable to the implemented 

countermeasures cannot be accurately quantified with a simple before/after comparison. The Phase Two 

Analysis involved a more detailed review of forty-five (45) sites using the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) 

procedures for estimating crash frequency with and without implementation of safety countermeasures. It is 

difficult to draw sweeping conclusions from the detailed analysis since there is so much variation, but individual 

sites and sites of similar type yield some interesting results, which should be used with caution. The observed 

before crashes were higher than the expected before crashes for most of the sites, suggesting that most sites 

were indeed overrepresented for crashes. Fifty-six (56%) of the sites had a reduction in the observed after 

crash frequency compared to the expected before crash frequency; this is the measure of safety effectiveness. 

Thirty-eight (38%) of the sites had fewer observed after crashes than the expected after crashes with the 

recommended countermeasures.

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and success of the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

More systemic programs

# RSAs completed

Organizational change

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

Increased focus on local road safety

Other-Improved data collection, transfer, access

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 66 of 77

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2017

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted 

Crash Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of 

Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality 

Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious 

Injury Rate

(per 

HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Other 1 Other 2 Other 3

Lane Departure 609.8 3,422.6 0.81 4.56 0 0 0

Roadway Departure 540 2,602.6 0.72 3.51 0 0 0

Intersections 201.6 2,270 0.27 3.03 0 0 0

Pedestrians 101.6 297.2 0.13 0.39 0 0 0

Bicyclists 8 67.4 0.01 0.09 0 0 0

Older Drivers 210 891.2 0.28 1.18 0 0 0

Motorcyclists 132.6 687.2 0.18 0.92 0 0 0

Work Zones 15.6 114 0.02 0.15 0 0 0
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 67 of 77

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

3500

4000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 68 of 77

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

4.5

5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016 2013-2017
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 69 of 77

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 70 of 77

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

113167.00 

Morgan SR 62 lm 

13.48 -13.68 SR 

62& SR 298 

12/27/12 5/10/13 

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Roadway 

widening - travel 

lanes

2.00 1.00 2.00 1.00

117094.00 

Hawkins SR 344 

lm 0.0 - 4.81 SR 

113 to SR 1 

2/15/13 5/16/13

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Roadway - other 17.00 10.00 2.00 8.00 4.00 27.00 14.00

115416.00 Wilson 

SR 141 lm 5.88-

9.33 From 

Hamilton Rd. to 

Lebanon city 

limits. 10/26/2012 

5/31/13

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Roadway - other 24.00 24.00 3.00 3.00 5.00 4.00 32.00 31.00

117485.00 Knox I 

40 lm 26.76 to 

28.23 cable 

2/15/13 5/31/13

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Roadway Roadway - other 27.00 26.00 3.00 2.00 13.00 4.00 43.00 32.00

117231.00 Benton 

I 40 lm 6.52 to 

8.45 8/23/12 

8/25/13

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) -

Other Freeways 

and Expressways

Roadway Pavement surface 

- miscellaneous

36.00 36.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 18.00 10.00 57.00 49.00

112787.00 

Putnam SR 135 

lm 4.02 Int Ditty 

Rd. 12/7/12 

12/26/13

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Roadway - other 8.00 5.00 2.00 5.00 3.00 13.00 10.00

117422.00 

Cheatham SR 12 

lm 0.72 to 5.85 E 

of Caldwell to 

McQuarry St. 

8/30/13 3/28/14

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - other

60.00 81.00 2.00 1.00 4.00 3.00 22.00 24.00 88.00 109.00

117739 

Lawrence SR 241 

lm 1.21 Int 

Ethridge Red Hill 

Rd. 12/6/13 

4/9/14

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway Roadway - other 1.00 2.00 1.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 3.00

115009.01 Tipton 

SR 384 lm 3.59 Int 

Sunnyside Rd. 

05/24/13 

4/23/14

Urban Major 

Collector

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control -

other

1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 71 of 77

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

117400.00 

Rutherford SR 266 

lm 8.62 to 13.39 

from west of 840 

to e. of SR 10 

8/30/13 2/24/14

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control -

other

63.00 75.00 2.00 1.00 5.00 2.00 27.00 29.00 97.00 107.00

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe any other aspects of HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate.

The implementation of the Road Safety Audit(RSA) "No-Plans". Any RSA that is being conducted within existing state right-of-way can be let to construction contract within a faster time frame... this is effective to address safety issues in a 

more timely manner.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 72 of 77

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative?

 01/06/2015

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2015 To: 2019

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update?

 2020

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

TDOT has a consultant under contract towards working for 2020 SHSP update

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 100 100

Route/Street Name (9) 100 100

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

100 100

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 100 100 100 100

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length (13) 100 100

Direction of Inventory (18) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100 100 100 100 100

Median Type (54) 100 100
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 73 of 77

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Access Control (22) 100 100

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

100 100

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

100 100 100 100

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

100 100 100 0

AADT Year (80) 100 0

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

100 100

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

100 100

AADT Year (80) 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

0 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

100 100

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

100 100
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 74 of 77

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

100 100

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 100 100

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 100 100

Functional Class (19) 100 100

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

100 100

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

100.00 94.44 75.00 75.00 90.91 90.91 100.00 88.89 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

The Long Range Planning Division collects all but three of the FDE’s. One data element that has partial collection is (#126 Intersection/Junction Geometry). The other two are #139 Unique Approach Identifier and #182 Interchange Type. 

Long Range Planning anticipates the ability to collect these remaining elements in the short term (1-3 years), well before the 2016 deadline.

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form Suspected Serious Injury Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual Suspected Serious Injury Yes The injury severity level for a person 

Involved in a crash. The determination of 

which attribute to assign should be based 

on the latest information available at the 

time the report is completed, except as 

described below for fatal Injuries.

Yes An incapacitating injury is any injury other 

than fatal which results in one or more of 

the following:

-Severe laceration resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in significant loss of blood

-Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

-Crush injuries

-Suspected skull, chest or abdominal injury 

other than bruises or minor lacerations

-Significant burns 

-Unconsciousness 

-Paralysis

Yes

Crash Database Suspected Serious Injury Yes N/A N/A N/A N/A
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 75 of 77

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Database Data Dictionary Suspected Serious Injury Yes The injury severity level for a person 

Involved in a crash. The determination of 

which attribute to assign should be based 

on the latest information available at the 

time the report is completed, except as 

described below for fatal Injuries

Yes An incapacitating injury is any injury other 

than fatal which results in one or more of 

the following:

-Severe laceration resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in significant loss of blood

-Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

-Crush injuries

-Suspected skull, chest or abdominal injury 

other than bruises or minor lacera-tions

-Significant burns

-Unconsciousness

-Paralysis

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

Yes

Describe the purpose and outcomes of the State’s HSIP program assessment.

FHWA in coordination with TDOT completes an HSIP program assessment annually.
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 76 of 77

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

STID Program Description 082417.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2018 Tennessee Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 77 of 77

Glossary

5 year rolling 

average 

means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. annual 

fatality rate). 

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety 

improvement 

project 

means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are consistent with a State 

strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 

feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled. 

Non-infrastructure 

projects 

are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of non-infrastructure projects 

include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, improvements in the 

collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement activities. 

Older driver special 

rule 

applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over 

the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data are 

available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013. 

Performance 

measure 

means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor changes 

in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives. 

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects. 

Roadway 

Functional 

Classification 

means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes, or systems, 

according to the character of service they are intended to provide. 

Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP) 

means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety data developed by a 

State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systematic refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across a 

system. 

Systemic safety 

improvement 

means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk roadway features 

that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer 

means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned 

for the fiscal year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.