Page 1 of 50

MAINE 

2022 ANNUAL REPORT 

Disclaimer: This report is the property of the State Department of Transportation (State DOT). The State DOT 

completes the report by entering applicable information into the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) online reporting tool. Once the State DOT completes the report pertaining to its 

State, it coordinates with its respective FHWA Division Office to ensure the report meets all legislative and regulatory 

requirements. FHWA’s Headquarters Office of Safety then downloads the State’s finalized report and posts it to the 

website (https://highways.dot.gov/safety/hsip/reporting) as required by law (23 U.S.C. 148(h)(3)(A)). 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 50

Table of Contents

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

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence .............................................................3

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

Introduction ...........................................................................................................................................5

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................. 5

Program Administration .....................................................................................................................5

Program Methodology .......................................................................................................................7

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................28

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................28

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................30

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................33

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................33

Safety Performance Targets ............................................................................................................38

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................40

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................41

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................41

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................41

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................45

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................46

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................49

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................50
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 50

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. 407 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.” 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 50

Executive Summary

Maine continues to use a data driven approach for HSIP project selection, assessing various aspects of crash 

performance. Before and After crash results comparisons on safety projects have consistently shown 

performance improvement over the years. HSIP selection process is re-evaluated each year to see if there are 

opportunities for enhancement and for improved alignment for the state's SHSP. 

Spot improvement project selection, particularly with regard to intersection safety, has been driven by HSM 

methodology this year, using our custom GIS intersection network screening process which computes excess 

crashes with EB adjustment for urban and rural stop and signal-controlled intersections on public highways in 

Maine regardless of jurisdiction. We continue to identify High Crash Locations each year as an additional 

consideration in prioritizing our spot improvement project candidates. 

MaineDOT now has the capability to perform segment-based highway network safety screening to enhance 

our data-driven safety analysis capabilities using a GIS-based application developed by Office of Safety and 

Mobility staff members. As with the intersection-based screening tool, our segment screening tool uses the 

HSM excess crash method with EB adjustment. We continue to collect cross slope information for the second 

lane of 2-lane rural highways using our ARAN 9000 by driving these roadways in the opposite direction of our 

normal pavement condition network collection activities as time and weather allows. 

In addition to spot improvements projects, Maine has used lane departure crash data to systemically evaluate 

our highway network for potential center line rumble strip locations as well as median cable barrier locations 

and has funded safety projects for both countermeasures. Maine's rumble strip program for non-interstate 

roadways installations are of the sinusoidal type and have been since 2018. We continue to use data to identify 

horizontal curves that could benefit from the installation of edge line rumble strips to mitigate went-off-road 

crashes on these curves. 

Maine’s 2020 annual VMT was approximately 12.48% lower than 2019 levels, but our 2021 VMT rebounded to 

approximately 3% lower than that experienced in 2019. 2022 VMT to date is nearly the same as 2021 VMT 

with the majority of the annual reduction occurring on our Interstate Highways on weekdays which we suspect 

is the result of continued telework or hybrid office/telework schedules for those who once relied on those 

roadways daily for commuting purposes. 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 50

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. 

MaineDOT's HSIP program is managed by the Office of Safety and Mobility which is led by a director level 

position that reports directly to the Chief Engineer. The Office of Safety and Mobility consists of a highway 

safety engineering section, mobility engineering section, travel analysis specialist, crash records section, and 

ADA Coordinator providing a single unit within the Department with the resources needed to perform datadriven safety and mobility analysis and coordinate safety candidate identification and evaluation efforts. 

In addition to identification of safety candidates through data driven analysis and network screening, the Office 

of Safety and Mobility coordinates regularly with a wide variety of resources within MaineDOT including 

Regional Operations, Local Roads, our Active Transportation Planner, Traffic Engineering, and Regional 

Planners to identify additional areas of concern and potential safety and spot improvement candidates and to 

ensure that HSIP funding is being used for projects that support the initiatives and strategies identified in 

Maine’s Strategic Highway Safety Plan. 

The Department's Safety/Mobility Committee was created within MaineDOT and is comprised of a cross 

representation of MaineDOT functional areas that meets quarterly to review and coordinate work on potential 

safety and mobility projects, and to provide input on prioritization of HSIP projects for inclusion in the work 

plan. This committee is co-chaired by the Safety Office Director and the State Traffic Engineer. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Office of Safety and Mobility

MaineDOT's Office of Safety and Mobility reports directly to the Chief Engineer who is part of the Department's 

Executive Office. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• SHSP Emphasis Area Data 

• Other-Use Benefit Cost Criteria 

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

Local roads are included with the state-wide project candidates. Maine captures crash and roadway data for all 

public roads and can evaluate all locations within the state based on similar crash and benefit/cost 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 50

performance comparisons. Local safety project requests based on crash concerns are reviewed and evaluated 

as part of the candidate screening process using our network safety screening tools and methods. 

Maine has an on-line public crash data query tool available to them to help with local analysis - and 

MPOs/RPOs have utilized this tool and praise its capabilities. The Office of Safety and Mobility has also made 

crash data available to the public through the Department's Map Viewer application for their use, and provides 

technical assistance to MPOs and municipalities that would like help evaluating their safety areas of concern. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design 

• Districts/Regions 

• Maintenance 

• Planning 

• Traffic Engineering/Safety 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

Though the Office of Safety and Mobility is the primary unit responsible for the development of HSIP project 

candidates, we coordinate with other units throughout the organization daily. Candidates generated from datadriven safety analysis or identified through other means are field reviewed through road safety audits or 

assessments that generally involve our region traffic engineers, regional planners, and active transportation 

planner. 

We also include other subject matter experts throughout the Department as warranted based on the type of 

safety issues we are investigating. Other systemic and spot improvement HSIP candidates are generated by 

our Traffic Engineering Group in the Bureau of Maintenance and Operations. Appropriate countermeasures are 

evaluated by the Safety Engineering section for each candidate using the Highway Safety Manual and checked 

to make sure the proposed candidate is an HSIP eligible activity in support of the Strategic Highway Safety 

Plan. This results in a vetted list of projects recommended for funding ranked in order of safety benefit/cost. 

In our experience, safety and mobility concerns are most often inextricably linked and MaineDOT strives to 

consider both throughout the project evaluation process. To that end the Department merged our 

Transportation Analysis unit, formerly in the Bureau of Planning, into the Office of Safety forming a new Office 

of Safety & Mobility. MaineDOT also has a standing Safety/Mobility Committee charged with functioning as a 

formal vehicle for communication and coordination of all work being performed in both areas. This Committee 

is co-chaired by the Director of the Office of Safety & Mobility and the State Traffic Engineer, and permanent 

members of this committee come from the following units within the Department: 

• Office of Safety & Mobility (Safety Engineering) 

• Office of Safety & Mobility (Mobility Engineering) 

• Office of Safety & Mobility (Crash Records) 

• M&O (Traffic Engineering) 

• M&O (Region Traffic Engineer) 

• M&O (ITS Manager) 

• Planning (Regional Planner) 

• Planning (Active Transportation Planner) 

• Project Development (Multimodal Program Director) 

• Project Development (Assistant Bureau Director) 

• FHWA Maine Division (Safety & Operations Engineer) 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 50

The Safety/Mobility committee generates a prioritized list of projects recommended for funding to the 

Department’s Core Executive Team for final approval and inclusion in the work plan. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning. 

• FHWA 

• Governors Highway Safety Office 

• Law Enforcement Agency 

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program 

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

Describe coordination with external partners. 

The MaineDOT Office of Safety has continuing communications and good relationships with all State, local and 

Federal partners. In addition to standard state partners such as the Bureau of Highway Safety, we also 

coordinate with Bureau of Motor Vehicles and DHS for alcohol/drug-related issues. In addition, we regularly 

work with AAA, Maine Motor Transport Association, Maine Turnpike, Bicycle Coalition of Maine, United Bikers 

of Maine (motorcycles) and others. We look for input from all and communicate out to them when needed. One 

means of communicating and coordinating with these external partners is through the Maine Transportation 

Safety Coalition (MTSC) which meets quarterly for the purpose of coordination. 

Our coordination efforts with our MPO/RPO partners occurs on an ongoing basis as well in addition to the 

performance target setting activities required each year. We try to include these partners in our road safety 

audit/assessment efforts and obtain their assistance in reviewing High Crash Locations within their respective 

areas for further investigation by the Office of Safety. These partners are also included in our annual regional 

"synergy" meetings as part of the work plan development process to coordinate all project work including 

safety work. 

Program Methodology 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

MaineDOT currently has an HSIP Manual in draft form pending final approval by our Safety/Mobility Committee 

and Engineering Council. 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Bicycle Safety 

• Horizontal Curve 

• Intersection 

• Left Turn Crash 

• Local Safety 

• Low-Cost Spot Improvements 

• Median Barrier 

• Pedestrian Safety 

• Right Angle Crash 

• Roadway Departure 

• Rural State Highways 

• Segments 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 50

• Shoulder Improvement 

• Sign Replacement And Improvement 

• Skid Hazard 

• Wrong Way Driving 

• Other-Median Cable Barrier -install completed in 2014 

• Other-Speed management 

• Other-Guard rail/end treatment upgrades 

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-As speci

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Population

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Probability of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 50

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:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Being evaluated as a systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Other-Highway Corridor Priority

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Other-Systemic approach being used to identify corridors of most exposure

• Probability of specific crash types

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Benefit to Cost ranking

• selection committee
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 50

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

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-MaineDOT's Highway 

Corridor Priority classifications

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Other-HSM-based screenings

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Benefit to Cost
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 50

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

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Program: Left Turn Crash

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Part of intersection strategy along with center left turn lane considerations

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Benefit/Cost Prioritization
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 50

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

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Usually work with MaineDOT's Local Roads unit

• selection committee
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 50

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:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 50

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:2

Cost Effectiveness:1

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2010

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Other-limited access highway • Median width

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Risk factors noted above.

• 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?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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).
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 50

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2018

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-increasing number of pedestrian fatalities

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-These projects are normally coordinated through MaineDOT's Bike/Ped coordinator

• selection committee

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).
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 50

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:2

Cost Effectiveness:1

Program: Right Angle Crash

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Part of Intersection Strategies

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Benefit/Cost Prioritization

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).
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 50

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic funding - such as for centerline rumble strips

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• Other-Systemic for both Head On and Went Off Road (WOR). Curves will be focus for WOR

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 50

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:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Traffic

• Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Coordinated with towns where speed concerns are expressed

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 50

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology:4/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Systemic funding - such as for centerline rumble strips

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Median width

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

• Other-Posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Level of service of safety (LOSS)

• Other-Systemic for both Head On and Went Off Road (WOR). Curves will be focus for WOR

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 50

Available funding:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1

Program: Shoulder Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-Lane Departure, Bicycles, Pedestrians

What is the funding approach for this program? 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

• Relative severity index

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Benefit/Cost Prioritization

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

Ranking based on B/C:1
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 50

Available funding:2

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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:2

Ranking based on net benefit:1
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 50

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology:8/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

• Excess proportions of specific crash types

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 50

Program: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:12/31/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal crashes only

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Other-Laregely driven by ramp 

design components

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Maine State Police input

• Other-ramp design

• Probability of specific crash types

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

program?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Other-Median Cable Barrier -install completed in 2014

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2016

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 50

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Other-Department saw this as a systemic need

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • Median width

• Other-Limited access roadway

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• 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?

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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

Program: Other-Speed management

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 50

• Traffic

• Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Coordinated with towns where speed concerns are expressed

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

program?

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

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).

Program: Other-Guard rail/end treatment upgrades

Date of Program Methodology:10/1/2017

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

• Other-State looking to make sure current standards met, especially in high speed/high volume 

locations

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• Traffic

• Volume

• Other-posted speed limit

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Other-Evaluation of hardware
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 50

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

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• selection committee

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:2

Other-Selection of locations of need as noted above:1

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 35

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

• Cable Median Barriers 

• Horizontal curve signs 

• Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or Delineation 

• Install/Improve Signing 

• Rumble Strips 

• Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation 

• Upgrade Guard Rails 

• Wrong way driving treatments 

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

• Crash data analysis 

• Data-driven safety analysis tools (HSM, CMF Clearinghouse, SafetyAnalyst, usRAP) 

• Engineering Study 

• Road Safety Assessment 

• SHSP/Local road safety plan 

• Stakeholder input 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 50

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

MaineDOT continues to expand the use of ITS technologies and has assigned an ITS manager position within 

the Traffic Engineering section in the Bureau of Maintenance and Operations. The Department is in the 

process of creating our Transportation Management Center (TMC) and evaluating the deployment of additional 

technologies. The ITS Manager has a permanent/formal seat on the Department's Safety/Mobility Committee, 

and the Director of the Office of Safety and Mobility participates on the ITS Steering Committee.

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.

MaineDOT has created and deployed a web-based GIS application to perform network safety screening of 

intersection assets in accordance with the HSM. Specifically, we have chosen to screen using excess 

expected average crash frequency with EB adjustment as our methodology. We have extended this method 

further by computing excess crash costs to provide weight and focus to those facilities that are experiencing 

the most severe injuries and fatalities in our efforts to lessen the number and severity of these events. The 

Department also uses HSM methods to perform alternative countermeasure analysis for individual locations 

and prioritization of projects recommended for funding. This year MaineDOT has developed a prototype safety 

screening tool for roadway segments which also is based on excess crashes with EB adjustment. This tool is 

based on ArcGIS Online technology and is in the form of a web-based dashboard. Though serviceable the tool 

is still being refined.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 50

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Calendar Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $25,094,358 $5,104,171 20.34%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

U.S.C. 148(g)(1))

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $4,245,699 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $1,095,420 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$1,842,300 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $4,349,740 $0 0%

Totals $31,286,398 $10,445,290 33.39%

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

safety projects? 

0%

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

0%

MaineDOT's Office of Safety & Mobility and our Local Roads Center are available to provide data and technical 

assistance to towns to help towns prioritize safety investments within their areas of responsibility. Highways 

within tribal areas are considered as part of our statewide safety analysis and eligible for safety project 

candidate funding identified as part of that analysis. There are no specific funding allocations for projects on 

either local or tribal road systems 

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

0%
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 50

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

0%

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%

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

the future.

None. MaineDOT Safety Office continues to work with internal and external partners to coordinate and 

integrate safety and seek the best opportunities to cost-effectively improve traffic safety. This process 

continues to be enhanced over time.

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on 

which the State would like to elaborate. 

2021 construction costs in Maine continued to rise substantially for most all types of projects, not just safety 

projects. Contractors in Maine have had difficulty finding qualified workers to increase their capacity to take on 

more work, and have had difficulty procuring materials needed to perform the work.

Maine's leading crash exposure continues to be Lane Departure, experiencing 70% of state-wide fatalities in 

this category. Additional systemic safety opportunities are being evaluated to achieve a better funding mix that 

is reflective of SHSP priorities and to address these lane departure crashes. 2016 was the first year where we 

fielded calls on public noise-related concerns. MaineDOT’s 2018-2021 statewide rumble strip contracts 

specified that only sinusoidal center line rumble strips would be installed. This has substantially reduced the 

number of noise complaints we have received from the public. 

Although not necessarily directly translating to HSIP funding, but certainly contributing to safety planning, there 

is continued dialogue with MPO's/RPO's on local safety needs and a cooperative approach on safety 

performance target setting. 

Pedestrian traffic fatalities are still a concern and a focused outreach program continued to be delivered 

throughout the state in 2021. This program includes public engagement and road safety audits and seeks to 

identify potential bike/pedestrian hazard mitigation that could be funded through HSIP or other fund sources. 

MaineDOT is also in the process of developing a pedestrian safety toolbox to identify appropriate safety 

countermeasures for locations with demonstrated vehicle/pedestrian crash exposure.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 50

General Listing of Projects

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

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

018769.20-

STATEWIDE, 

INTERSTATE 

STRIPING

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

115.999 Miles $1215000 $1610587 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Explore 

pavement 

markings and 

sign 

enhancement 

opportunities

018769.21-

STATEWIDE, 

INTERSTATE 

STRIPING

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

54.49 Miles $976791 $976791 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Explore 

pavement 

markings and 

sign 

enhancement 

opportunities

019001.00-

SANFORD, 

ALFRED & 

SCHOOL ST

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control –

new traffic signal

1 Locations $1655610 $1840000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 15,473 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

020581.20-

STATEWIDE, 

STRIPING 2020

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

116 Miles $4759977 $5951345 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Explore 

pavement 

markings and 

sign 

enhancement 

opportunities

020581.21-

STATEWIDE, 

STRIPING 2021

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings -

remarking

54.49 Miles $2063817 $5084771 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Explore 

pavement 

markings and 

sign 

enhancement 

opportunities

021783.00-

EDGECOMB, 

ROUTE 1

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

1 Locations $1995871 $2755247 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther11,460 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

022879.00-

HERMON, ROUTE 

2

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

1 Locations $327889 $964359 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Major Collector 5,840 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

022962.00-

POWNAL, ROUTE 

9

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control –

two-way stop to 

all-way stop

1 Locations $151227 $234726 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Major Collector 1,627 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 50

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

023030.00-WEST 

BATH, STATE 

ROAD

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

other

1 Locations $578205 $1092483 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 6,904 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

023733.00-

REGION 3, CABLE 

GUARDRAIL

Roadside Barrier- metal 1.205 Miles $282357 $313730 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end treatment 

safety 

performance.

023761.00-2020 

STATEWIDE 

RUMBLE STRIPS

Roadway Rumble strips – 

center

100 Miles $602254 $669950 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 6,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Identify 

priority areas 

for centerline 

and edge line 

rumble strips

023791.00-WELLS, 

ROUTE 109

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

1 Locations $92000 $110000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther16,478 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

023793.00-WELLS, 

ROUTE109

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

new traffic signal

1 Locations $208369 $366000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal ArterialOther9,689 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

023801.00-

WINDHAM, 

ROUTE 202

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

new traffic signal

1 Locations $105548 $275134 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Minor Arterial 6,092 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

023871.21-

STATEWIDE 

STRIPING 2021 

CONTRA

Roadway 

delineation

Longitudinal 

pavement 

markings - 

remarking

618 Miles $208903 $261128 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Explore 

pavement 

markings and 

sign 

enhancement 

opportunities

024199.00-

TURNER, ROUTE 

4

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

0.291 Miles $1241050 $1400000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther13,360 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

024209.00-

PALMYRA, ROUTE 

2

Roadside Roadside - other 1 Locations $300145 $743875 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Rural Principal ArterialOther3,306 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

024235.00-2021 

STATEWIDE 

RUMBLE STRIPS

Roadway Rumble strips – 

center

100 Miles $569314 $741642 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 6,000 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Identify 

priority areas 

for centerline 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 50

PROJECT NAME IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE

HSIP 

PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

LAND 

USE/AREA 

TYPE

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP

METHOD 

FOR SITE 

SELECTION

SHSP 

EMPHASIS 

AREA

SHSP 

STRATEGY

and edge line 

rumble strips

024257.00-

NORRIDGEWOCK, 

RIVER ROAD

Roadside Barrier- metal 0.5 Miles $61600 $84500 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Major Collector 2,492 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end treatment 

safety 

performance.

024259.00-

MADISON, EAST 

MADISON ROAD

Roadside Barrier- metal 0.1 Miles $101600 $130000 Other 

Federal-aid 

Funds (i.e. 

STBG, 

NHPP)

Rural Minor Collector 1,013 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane Departure Continue 

review of 

guardrail and 

end treatment 

safety 

performance.

024359.00-

BRUNSWICK EXIT 

28 LIGHTINGFREEPORT 

CAMERAS

Lighting Interchange 

lighting

2.442 Miles $1976257 $2195841 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate35,400 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Develop 

Solutions for 

Reviewed 

Locations

025228.19-

INTERSTATE 295 

SERVICE PATROL

Roadway Roadway - other 49.97 Miles $102521 $113912 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialInterstate54,180 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Emergency 

Services/Incident 

Management

Promote a 

culture of 

safety

025228.20-

INTERSTATE 95-

295 SERVICE 

PATROL

Roadway Roadway - other 49.97 Miles $143383 $159315 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialInterstate54,180 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Emergency 

Services/Incident 

Management

Promote a 

culture of 

safety
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 50

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends 

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

years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatalities 145 131 156 160 172 136 157 165 153

Serious Injuries 865 815 754 746 728 685 689 607 710

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.010 0.913 1.050 1.070 1.140 0.910 1.040 1.250 1.040

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

6.010 5.680 5.080 4.980 4.810 4.560 4.560 4.590 4.810

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

15 11 19 21 23 8 19 11 21

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

59 88 64 72 75 72 61 48 61
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 50

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 50

Describe fatality data source. 

Other

If Other Please describe

FARS and MaineDOT Dashboard

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

ownership. 

Year 2021

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

7.6 26.8 0.36 1.28

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0 18.06

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

23 81.4 1.29 4.6

Rural Minor Arterial 18.2 80 1.11 4.81

Rural Minor Collector 30.4 105.4 2.05 7.13

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 50

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 Major Collector 16.2 60.6 1.18 4.74

Rural Local Road or 

Street

14.4 91.2 1 6.43

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

5.6 25.6 0.42 1.96

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0.8 6.2 0.49 3.81

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

7.2 46.4 1.03 6.69

Urban Minor Arterial 10.6 64.6 1.06 6.54

Urban Minor Collector 8.2 46.8 4.48 15.11

Urban Major Collector 1 16.8 0.11 4.67

Urban Local Road or 

Street

6.6 32.2 1.42 6.98
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 50

Year 2021

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

129.2 545.4 1.16 4.85

County Highway 

Agency

0.2 1.6 1.32 9.79

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

25.6 122.8 1.4 6.73

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0 0.8 0 12.66

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 0 0 0 0

Other Local Agency 0 0 0 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0 0 0 0

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 3.2 15 0.21 0.99

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

0.2 0 1.44 0

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0 0 0

Fatality Data for Federal Functional Class and Roadway Ownership Tables in this report taken from the 

MaineDOT Data Warehouse and is slightly different than that which is found in the FARS system.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2023 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:160.0

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 50

Maine Fatality data has varied widely during the 2022 Benchmark Performance Period (2017-2021) ranging 

from 139 in 2018 to 172 in 2017. The 5-year average was 156.8 through the period. A significantly lower VMT 

experienced in 2020 due to the pandemic combined with the 2nd highest fatality count during the benchmark 

period has contributed to the highest fatality rate in Maine since 2006. This will likely result in the 5-year fatality 

rate continuing to trend upward. The 2022 fatality count as of April 30, 202s is significantly higher than at this 

point in 2021. Speed, distraction, operating under the influence, and not wearing passenger restraints all have 

contributed to the increase. Maine is setting its 2023 fatality target equal to the 2022 target and will likely 

continue to hold it level until this upward trend in fatality counts is reversed.

Number of Serious Injuries:710.0

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

Serious Injuries (A) counts have continued to show steady improvement over the years, but it too, has had 

erratic performance in the past. The 2022 Benchmark Performance (2017-2021) 5-year average for serious 

injuries 684.4, a slight decrease from the previous benchmark period. Maine did, however, see a slight 

increase in serious injuries in 2021 after experiencing substantially fewer in 2020 during the disruptions in 

traffic caused by COVID. The overall trend in recent years was downward, however, so Maine is taking an 

optimistic view that this downward trend will continue by setting a 2023 target slightly lower than the 2022 

target.

Fatality Rate:1.120

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

Maine has decided to set the 2023 target fatality rate equal to that of the 2022 target fatality rate for the same 

reasons the fatality count target was set level.

Serious Injury Rate:4.800

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

Serious Injuries (A) rates in Maine have continued to show steady improvement over the years, and as with 

Serious Injury counts, Maine is taking an optimistic view that this downward trend will continue, and have 

actually set this rate slightly lower than our 2022 target.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:85.0

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

As with statewide crash fatalities, this data has varied widely from year to year through the benchmark 

performance period, mainly due to the disparity observed from 2017 to 2018. The 2019 count matched that of 

2018 which perhaps indicates progress. While the 2020 fatality count overall was high, these were largely 

motor-vehicle related crashes not involving non-motorized system users. Our 2020 non-motorized K&A count 

of 61 was our lowest in more than 17 years though rose to 83 in 2021. The 5-year Average for the 2017-2021 

Benchmark Period was 80.0, slightly lower than the previous evaluation period. It is hoped that our continued 

focused pedestrian outreach in Maine through STEP and HeadsUp programs will continue to bring down our 

bike/ped fatality numbers and I recommend setting a slightly lower target for 2023 than that of 2022.

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

safety performance targets. 

The Maine Bureau of Highway Safety and MaineDOT reviewed last year's targets and worked collaboratively 

to arrive at agreed upon goals and to make sure they are in context with the latest influencing factors such as 

the unexpected traffic volumes experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic. MaineDOT has earlier discussed 

its target setting philosophy with MPOs and how it would translate to MPO performance targets. The 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 50

Department prepares suggested performance targets for each MPO as a starting point for discussion and 

provides the necessary data for them to evaluate their own past performance and to either accept MaineDOT's 

recommendation or to come up with their own in support of the statewide Safety Performance Targets.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

None

Describe progress toward meeting the State’s 2021 Safety Performance Targets (based 

on data available at the time of reporting). For each target, include a discussion of any 

reasons for differences in the actual outcomes and targets.

PERFORMANCE MEASURES TARGETS ACTUALS

Number of Fatalities 158.0 156.6

Number of Serious Injuries 725.0 683.8

Fatality Rate 1.120 1.076

Serious Injury Rate 5.020 4.666

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

89.0 79.8

Unlike last year it appears that Maine has met all five of our 2021 Safety Performance Targets. In 2020 we 

failed to meet our fatality rate target mainly due to the substantial drop in statewide VMT during the COVID-19 

pandemic which was unknown and therefore not reflected in our 2020 targets. The return of 2021 VMT to 

within 3% of Maine's pre-pandemic level has helped mitigate the impact on both the fatality and serious injury 

rates in this evaluation period.

Our goal remains to level off our annual fatality count and resulting rate at which point we can work towards 

further reductions. Maine’s serious injury count has been trending downward since 2012. Though we 

experienced an unusually high serious injury count in 2021 we're hopeful that was an outlier and our progress 

on reducing serious injuries will continue. Our target setting reflects these goals.

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

No

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 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Fatalities

27 32 42 28 31 33 29

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

70 78 92 86 95 61 79
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 50

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Benefit/Cost Ratio 

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

Infrastructure projects are evaluated each year with results included with HSIP (before/after injuries and B/C). 

Systemic improvements like rumble strips are periodically reviewed for collective performance where installed. 

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of 

the State's program level evaluations. 

Maine's fatality rate has continued to trend upward. In 2021, our statewide fatality total was similar to our 2019 

count with statewide VMT returning to a level approximately 3% lower than pre-pandemic levels. Our serious 

injury rate has been steadily decreasing since a peak in 2012. This downward trend continued in 2021 though 

our 2021 serious injury count saw a sharp increase. 

Our overall benefit-cost performance on mitigation efforts has been good. Systemic installations such as center 

line rumble strips have continued to prove very effective at a relatively low cost. We plan to expand this 

program as we continue to explore new systemic safety programs that have proven to be successful in other 

states. We continue to assess our center line rumble strip program for those segments with three years of 

before/after crash data available which when last evaluated showed an average reduction in fatalities and 

serious injuries of 62.9% and 48.1% respectively where these are installed. MaineDOT is also continuing a 

study quantifying the benefits of converting rural two-way stop controlled intersection to all-stop controlled 

intersections. Preliminary data shows a significant reduction in both the number and severity of crashes at 

these facilities after conversion. Overall, we are observing a 70% reduction in crash costs with this 

countermeasure. 

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and 

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• # miles improved by HSIP 

• Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process 

• Increased focus on local road safety 

• More systemic programs 

• Policy change 

• Other-Pedestrian Strategic Focus Outcomes 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2021
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 50

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)

Lane Departure 107 375 0.74 2.56

Intersections 23.8 156.8 0.16 1.06

Pedestrians 13.4 47.8 0.09 0.32

Bicyclists 2.4 18.2 0.02 0.12

Older Drivers 36.6 72.8 0.25 0.49

Motorcycles 24.6 117.6 0.17 0.8
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 50

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Lane

Departure

Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 50

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

Lane Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

Lane Departure Intersections Pedestrians Bicyclists Older Drivers Motorcycles

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2013-2017 2014-2018 2015-2019 2016-2020 2017-2021
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 50

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 50

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative? 

 11/20/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2017 To: 2022

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update? 

 2022

We are currently working with our safety partners and stakeholders to update our 2017 manual with a target to publish in November 2022. 

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT Segment Identifier 

(12) [12]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Route Number (8) 

[8]

100 100

Route/Street Name 

(9) [9]

100 100

Federal Aid/Route 

Type (21) [21]

100 100

Rural/Urban 

Designation (20) [20]

100 100 100 100

Surface Type (23) 

[24]

100 100 100 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 50

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 100

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100 100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100 100 100 100 100

INTERSECTION Unique Junction 

Identifier (120) [110]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

100 100

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

100 100

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

50 50

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

50 50

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

100 100

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 50

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (197) [187]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201) [191]

100 100

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195) [185]

100 100

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

100 100

Interchange Type 

(182) [172]

Ramp AADT (191) 

[181]

100 100

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

100 100

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 100.00 100.00 87.50 87.50 81.82 81.82 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00

*Based on Functional Classification (MIRE 1.0 Element Number) [MIRE 2.0 Element Number]

No changes from the last reporting period. 

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. 

MaineDOT's remaining data elements will mostly be derived programmatically through our GIS tools from our data already in our data warehouse to meet the requirements.
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 50

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

MaineDOT HSIP Manual Draft - 4-21-2021.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2022 Maine Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 50

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 noninfrastructure 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.