Page 1 of 36

ALASKA 

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 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 36

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 .......................................................................................................................10

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................10

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................12

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................16

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................16

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................21

Applicability of Special Rules...........................................................................................................24

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................25

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................25

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................25

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................29

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................32

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................35

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................36
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 36

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 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 36

Executive Summary

Under the Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), the Alaska Department of Transportation & 

Public Facilities (DOT&PF) identifies high risk intersections and roads, scopes and prioritizes corrective 

projects, funds the most cost-effective projects, and evaluates actual project and program effectiveness. HSIP 

dollars are distributed to the most effective projects from a single statewide fund. The purpose of the Alaska 

HSIP is to “maximize lives saved and major injuries eliminated per dollar spent.” As of FFY 2022, we currently 

measure our post-construction program benefit-cost ratio at approximately 6.5:1, a successful ratio achieved 

through a program that blends spot and systemic projects throughout the State in urban as well as rural 

locations.

Regional Traffic and Safety personnel identify, scope, estimate, and rank candidate projects according to 

benefit-cost ratio (ranked projects) and potential for crash reduction (non-ranked projects). HQ Traffic & Safety 

reviews proposed new projects, works with the regions to clarify project description and scope, and submits 

recommended projects to DOT&PF's Chief Engineer for approval. Following approval of new HSIP projects, 

HQ Traffic and Safety selects the most effective projects and proposes a statewide HSIP funding plan for the 

coming federal fiscal year for approval by the Chief Engineer and the Director of Program Development. 

The HSIP funding plan typically includes a blend of ongoing projects and new projects. Regions design and 

construct funded projects and generate before-after studies when three years of post-improvement crash data 

becomes available. HQ Traffic & Safety manages funding for the statewide HSIP, annually updates the HSIP 

Handbook, maintains program effectiveness data, and produces the annual HSIP report. 

As noted in previous HSIP Annual Reports, DOT&PF had not been able to provide timely data on 

serious injuries for a number of years. This was caused by a combination of difficulties in getting 

crash reports from the Alaska Division of Motor Vehicles (which continues to experience significant 

and prolonged delays in data availability) and challenges with processing data once it had been 

received from the DMV.

DOT&PF has worked diligently to resolve the data processing issues that led to this multi-year 

backlog. In the 2021 HSIP Annual Report, DOT&PF provided certified serious injury data through 

2017 as well as uncertified data for 2018 and 2019. In the past six months, DOT&PF has certified 

three years of crash reports (2018 - 2020) and has completed data entry on crash reports resulting in 

injury or death for 2021. However, the serious injury data for 2021 must undergo final QC prior to 

being certified. Due to the nature of the remaining quality control activities, which includes removal of 

duplicate reports, any changes in the data would be likely to reduce the number of serious injuries 

reported. 
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 36

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. 

The general structure of Alaska's HSIP is described in Sec. 1.3 of the Alaska HSIP Handbook: 

Regional Traffic and Safety Engineers in Alaska’s three regions (Northern, Central and Southcoast) screen 

crash data and consider other information to identify projects. Projects can be either ranked or non-ranked. 

Ranked projects are implemented at locations with high crash history and are ranked by analyzing the 

benefit:cost ratio of specific safety-related improvements using estimated crash reduction factors and 

improvement costs. Non-ranked projects are implemented at locations with potential for severe crashes 

identified in SHSP strategies and may be spot or system-wide improvements. System-wide, or systemic, 

improvement projects are implemented to reduce potential for fatal and serious injuries by mitigating road 

conditions or characteristics associated with specific crash types. Non-infrastructure projects are limited to 

those types specifically included in Appendix A (p. A-20 to A-22) of the Alaska HSIP Handbook, a reprinting of 

23 U.S.C. Section 148 (a)(4)(B). 

Alaska’s three regional Traffic and Safety sections submit proposed projects to the State Traffic and Safety 

Engineer for review. HQ Traffic & Safety staff review the proposed new projects, work with regions to clarify 

project descriptions and scope, and submit recommended projects to the Chief Engineer for advancement as 

safety projects. Following Chief Engineer approval of new HSIP projects, the State Traffic and Safety Engineer 

proposes a list of new and ongoing projects for funding and coordinates with HQ Project Development to 

prepare a funding plan for the coming federal fiscal year. 

HQ Traffic and Safety personnel manage the federal funds for approved projects. Regional Traffic and Safety 

personnel work with preconstruction and construction personnel to ensure projects remain consistent with their 

HSIP scope throughout design and construction. The regions conduct follow-up studies to determine the 

effectiveness of completed projects. HQ Traffic & Safety summarizes the overall effectiveness of the statewide 

program in the annual HSIP Report. 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Engineering

The HSIP program manager is located with the DOT&PF Statewide Design and Engineering Services division 
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 36

(Chief Engineer's office). DOT&PF regional HSIP practitioners are located within the regional preconstruction 

divisions. 

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process 

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

Safety projects on all public roads in Alaska are eligible to compete for HSIP funding. The same process is 

used to prioritize projects on both state and non-state (including local and tribal) roads. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design 

• Districts/Regions 

• Governors Highway Safety Office 

• Maintenance 

• Operations 

• Planning 

• Traffic Engineering/Safety 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

Design: Regional Traffic and Safety personnel identify, scope, estimate, and rank candidate projects according 

to benefit:cost ratio (ranked projects) and potential for crash reduction (non-ranked projects). 

HQ Traffic and Safety reviews proposed new projects, works with the regions to clarify project description and 

scope, and submits recommended projects to the DOT&PF Chief Engineer for funding approval. 

Planning: HQ Traffic and Safety develops the funding plan in coordination with the Office of Program 

Development. 

Maintenance and Operations: Regional Traffic and Safety consults with M&O staff to determine alternative 

project nominations where safety problems may exist despite the lack of historic crash data. 

Governors Highway Safety Office: GHSO splits penalty transfer funding to address engineering solutions to 

highway safety. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• FHWA 

• Governors Highway Safety Office 

• Law Enforcement Agency 

• Local Government Agency 

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

• Tribal Agency 
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 36

External partners participate in the HSIP planning process through both the SHSP and the Performance Target 

setting process. 

Describe coordination with external partners. 

The formal mechanisms in the program for coordination with external partners include both the SHSP 

development and implementation process and establishment of annual performance measure targets. 

However, Regional Traffic and Safety Engineers continuously work with external partners, including local and 

tribal agencies, to identify and develop HSIP project nominations. Their input is valued and considered in the 

development and delivery of HSIP projects. 

Coordination with FHWA is described under the most recent Stewardship and Oversight Agreement. 

Program Methodology 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• HSIP (no subprograms) 

Program: HSIP (no subprograms)

Date of Program Methodology:4/18/2022

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 • Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Crash rate

• Critical rate

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

program?
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 36

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Competitive application process

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Ranking based on B/C:90

Available funding:10

Total Relative Weight:100

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 62

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal 

• Clear Zone Improvements 

• High friction surface treatment 

• Install/Improve Lighting 

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening 

• Upgrade Guard Rails 

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 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

Not at this time. 
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 36

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

No

Not at this time. HSIP funding was used to develop Alaska specific calibration factors for some SPFs in the 

HSM. DOT&PF had envisioned the calibration factors for use at planning level for HSIP nominations, but the 

calibration factors were much higher than expected, with low confidence for reliable predicted outcomes.
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 36

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed 

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

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

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % 

OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $60,949,593 $45,442,011 74.56%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$9,023,200 $15,248,420 168.99%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$9,023,200 $15,248,420 168.99%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$2,090,430 $2,507,278 119.94%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $7,004,447 $5,292,360 75.56%

Totals $88,090,870 $83,738,489 95.06%

Notes to Matt (delete when done): 

Obligated funds are from FFY22 HSIP Worksheet 8.17.22 (For HSIP Report) provided by Liz and in the Mat'ls 

folder. Values are the totals in column H Obligated Amt on FFY22 HSIP PJs tab;note that this yields penalty 

numbers that exceed this year's penalty APPNs, not sure why (possibly deobligated funds being sent out?) but 

wanted to be consistent with what I'm doing for the other numbers. mfm 

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

safety projects? 

$18,354,328

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

$24,889,638

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

$1,717,200
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 36

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

$1,081,210

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.

Issues related to the COVID pandemic are slowly resolving in Alaska, although we continue to see delays 

related to DOT&PF or contractor staff contracting the virus. In addition, ongoing shortages of skilled labor -

already present prior to the pandemic - are exacerbated both by COVID-related issues and as a result of the 

increase in competition for that labor related to the expanded infrastructure funding from the BIL/IIJA. DOT&PF 

also has faced increased stress from response to issues caused by melting permafrost, geography, and 

impacts from natural hazards (for example, flooding and earthquakes).
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 36

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

Steese 

Expressway/Chena 

Hot Springs Road 

Ramp Termini 

Roundabouts

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control –

Modern 

Roundabout

2 Numbers $370866 $370866 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther8,155 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

NR Guardrail 

Inventory and 

Upgrades

Roadside Barrier - other 970 Miles $2253264 $2253264 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal ArterialOther99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address runoff-road 

crashes

HSIP: Airport Way / 

Steese Expwy 

Interchange

Interchange 

design

Convert at-grade 

intersection to 

interchange

1 Numbers $19513156 $19513156 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Multiple/Varies 36,265 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

NR Systemic 

Signal Upgrades

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

additional signal 

heads

8 Intersections $792000 $792000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Systemic Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

City of Fairbanks 

Systemic Signal 

Upgrades

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

additional signal 

heads

22 Numbers $1300000 $1300000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 154)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Systemic Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

Chena Pump Rd @ 

Chena Small 

Tracts Rd 

Roundabout

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control –

Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersections $400000 $400000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

George Parks 

Highway Systemic 

Passing Lanes 

Project

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

80.2 Miles $353160 $392400 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther99,999 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Lane 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

passing 

crashes
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 36

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

Anchorage 

Pedestrian 

Lighting, Phase 1 

(nomination name 

was Minnesota Dr / 

Seward Hwy / 

Tudor Rd / 

Muldoon Rd 

Lighting 

Improvements)

Lighting Lighting - other 1.16 Miles $1502929 $1633450 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Implement 

appropriate 

engineering 

strategies to 

address 

high-crash 

locations 

involving 

older drivers 

and 

pedestrians

Old Glenn Hwy and 

Knik Goose Bay 

Rd: Wider Lane 

Lines

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control 

- other

23.5 Miles $2144371 $2144371 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Rural Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address runoff-road 

crashes

Systemic CR OneWay Signing 

Compliance

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control 

- other

163 Numbers $257000 $257000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

CR Guardrail 

Inventory & 

Upgrade

Roadside Barrier - other 654 Miles $40294987 $44772207 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address runoff-road 

crashes

A Street Midtown 

Couplet - Overhead 

Signal Indication 

Upgrades

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

additional signal 

heads

2 Intersections $1095694 $1217438 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

Church Rd and 

Spruce Ave 

Intersection 

Flashing Beacon

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

1 Locations $37800 $42000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

number of 

fatal and 

serious injury 

intersection 

crashes

Wasilla-Fishhook 

Rd and Spruce 

Ave/Peck St 

Roundabout

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

1 Locations $324900 $361000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Spot Intersections Reduce the 

number of 

fatal and 

serious injury 

intersection 

crashes
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 36

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

5th Ave: Concrete 

St to Karluck St 

Pedestrian 

Improvements

Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Medians and 

pedestrian refuge 

areas

1 Locations $229500 $255000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate44,270 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Pedestrians Reduce the 

number of 

fatal and 

serious injury 

pedestrian 

and bicycle 

crashes

Palmer-Fishhook 

Rd and Trunk Rd 

Roundabout

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

1 Numbers $320000 $320000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

Anchorage 

Flashing Yellow 

Arrow and Signal 

Head Display 

Improvements

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

flashing yellow 

arrow

21 Intersections $1663000 $1663000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Principal ArterialOther99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

Pittman Rd 

Shoulder Widening 

and Slope 

Flattening

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

6.307 Miles $855000 $950000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 940 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address runoff-road 

crashes

KTN Stedman and 

Deermont Street 

Intersection Safety 

Improvements - 

HSIP

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Numbers $651436 $723817 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes

POW - Hollis 

Highway Guardrail 

Safety 

Improvements 

HSIP

Roadside Barrier end 

treatments (crash 

cushions, 

terminals)

27 Locations $96750 $107500 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 290 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Reduce the 

number of 

fatal and 

serious injury 

lane 

departure 

crashes.

WRG - Zimpovia 

Highway Rock Fall 

Mitigation HSIP

Roadside Removal of fixed 

objects (trees, 

poles, etc.)

2 Miles $164250 $182500 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Collector 427 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

HSIP 

qualified 

projects

JNU - EganYandukin 

Intersection Safety 

Improvements

Speed 

management

Speed 

management - 

other

1 Intersections $187389 $208210 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Implement 

HSIP 

qualified 

projects
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 36

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

SR Regionwide 

Guardrail Inventory 

and Upgrade HSIP

Roadside Roadside - other 113.01 Miles $600000 $600000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address runoff-road 

crashes

JNU Loop Road - 

Valley Boulevard 

Intersection Safety 

Improvements 

HSIP

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

1 Intersections $500000 $500000 Penalty 

Funds (23 

U.S.C. 164)

Urban Multiple/Varies 99,999 99999 Multiple / 

Varies

Spot Intersections Implement 

infrastructure 

projects to 

address 

intersection 

crashes
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 36

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 51 73 65 84 78 80 67 64 66

Serious Injuries 473 349 337 397 341 329 292 291 259

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.052 1.503 1.288 1.602 1.414 1.458 1.138 1.194 1.231

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

9.757 7.187 6.680 7.571 6.180 5.996 4.959 5.429 4.098

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

7 17 12 13 17 15 8 14 19

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

46 39 57 56 39 56 41 32 35
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 36

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 18 of 36

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 19 of 36

Alaska DOT&PF uses FARS data to determine crash fatalities, and our internal crash database, CARE, to 

generate serious injury data for HSIP annual reports. AK DOT&PF has updated our data methodology in order 

to further ensure that year-to-year results are comparable. In the past, we have conducted searches in CARE 

manually, which provides some opportunity for researcher judgment to vary over time. Starting in 2022, we 

have developed standard filters for serious injury data research in order to ensure that the same search 

parameters are used annually. 

No changes have been made to the research methodology applied to fatality data. 2021 fatality data is 

provisional, as FARS has not yet closed 2021. 

Describe fatality data source. 

FARS

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

15.6 46.2 1.9 5.6

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

0 0 0 0

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 20 of 36

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)

Freeways and 

Expressways

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

6.2 19 2.12 6.63

Rural Minor Arterial 2.6 8.4 2.19 7.01

Rural Minor Collector 5 18.8 2.6 8.85

Rural Major Collector 4.4 20.8 1.55 7.27

Rural Local Road or 

Street

5.4 11.6 0.77 1.73

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

7.6 28.2 0.99 3.62

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0 0 0

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

13.4 66 1.47 7.24

Urban Minor Arterial 6.6 35.6 1.29 7.05

Urban Minor Collector 1.4 4.8 1.21 4.25

Urban Major Collector 1.6 16.8 0.67 7.12

Urban Local Road or 

Street

1 13.6 0.15 2.06

Missing Function 

Class

0.2 10.2 0 0.96

Other 0.2 3.8 0 0
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 36

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

60.2 233.2 1.2 4.7

County Highway 

Agency

6.8 48.6 0.51 3.48

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

0.2 0 0 0

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

3.4 12 0.85 2.5

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 0 0 0 0

Other Local Agency 0.4 0 5.27 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0 0.2 0 0

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

0 0.2 0 0

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0.2 0 0.09

Other/Unknown 0.2 8 0.16 3.77

FEDERAL 0 0 0

Federal

Safety Performance Targets 

Safety Performance Targets 

Calendar Year 2023 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:70.0
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 36

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

Alaska followed the process described in FHWA-SA-16-101 to establish targets based on trend analysis, the 

influence of external factors, and the consideration of select scenarios. This target is representative of an 

aspirational view of annual fatality numbers possibly decreasing in light of COVID-19 factors, even considering 

the external upward pressures for this performance measure in light of the most likely scenarios. Alaska's 

SHSP was updated in 2018 and continues to reflect the State's vision of Toward Zero Deaths. Reporting on 

this target annually will keep the TZD vision firmly planted in Alaska's traffic safety efforts and will assist Alaska 

in consideration of program improvements to reinforce the SHSP TZD vision. Our FFY 2023 target for fatalities

(70) is slightly higher than the SHSP 2022 goal (67), but we have been decreasing our target values in recent 

years striving toward the SHSP goal. Since the beginning of Alaska's target setting we've rounded our K and SI 

targets to the next highest multiple of 5.

Number of Serious Injuries:325.0

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

Alaska followed the process described in FHWA-SA-16-101 to establish targets based on trend analysis, the 

influence of external factors, and the consideration of select scenarios. This target is representative of an 

aspirational view of annual serious injury numbers continuing to decline even considering the external upward 

pressures for this performance measure in light of the most likely scenarios. Alaska's SHSP was updated in 

2018 and continues to reflect the State's vision of Toward Zero Deaths. Reporting on this target annually will 

keep the TZD vision firmly planted in Alaska's traffic safety efforts and will assist Alaska in consideration of 

program improvements to reinforce the SHSP TZD vision. Alaska's FFY 2023 Serious Injury target (325) is 

below the SHSP 2022 goal (331).

Fatality Rate:1.300

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

Alaska followed the process described in FHWA-SA-16-101 to establish targets based on trend analysis, the 

influence of external factors, and the consideration of select scenarios. This target is representative of an 

aspirational view of annual fatality numbers leveling off even considering the external upward pressures for this 

performance measure in light of the most likely scenarios. It is possible, however, that traffic volumes will 

decrease more than expected, resulting in a higher fatality rate than expected. Alaska's SHSP was updated in 

2018 and continues to reflect the State's vision of Toward Zero Deaths. Reporting on this target annually will 

keep the TZD vision firmly planted in Alaska's traffic safety efforts and will assist Alaska in consideration of 

program improvements to reinforce the SHSP TZD vision. 

Serious Injury Rate:5.900

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

Alaska followed the process described in FHWA-SA-16-101 to establish targets based on trend analysis, the 

influence of external factors, and the consideration of select scenarios. This target is representative of an 

aspirational view of annual serious injury numbers continuing to decline even considering the external upward 

pressures for this performance measure in light of the most likely scenarios. It is possible, however, that traffic 

volumes will decrease more than expected, resulting in a higher serious injury rate than expected. Alaska's 

SHSP was updated in 2018 and continues to reflect the State's vision of Toward Zero Deaths. Reporting on 

this target annually will keep the TZD vision firmly planted in Alaska's traffic safety efforts and will assist Alaska 

in consideration of program improvements to reinforce the SHSP TZD vision.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:58.0
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 36

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

Alaska followed the process described in FHWA-SA-16-101 to establish targets based on trend analysis, the 

influence of external factors, and the consideration of select scenarios. This target is aspirational, and focused 

on Alaska's vision of zero deaths, but also considered in light of the current upward trend and external upward 

pressures for this performance measure in light of the most likely scenarios. Alaska's SHSP was updated in 

2018 and continues to reflect the State's vision of Toward Zero Deaths. While there is no specific goal in our 

current SHSP for this performance measure, reporting on this target annually will keep the TZD vision firmly 

planted in Alaska's traffic safety efforts and will assist Alaska in consideration of program improvements to 

reinforce the SHSP TZD vision.

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

safety performance targets. 

Both the Fairbanks Metropolitan Area Transportation System (FMATS) Executive Director and Anchorage 

Metropolitan Area Transportation Solutions (AMATS) Coordinator were included in meetings during the 

development of initial target recommendations that were delivered to DOT&PF management for review and 

edits.

The Alaska Highway Safety Office (AHSO) was involved in establishing targets throughout the entire process. 

An AHSO data analyst attended every meeting and was instrumental in the analysis of data trends and 

external factors. The Governor's highway safety representative was a signatory to the memo signed by the 

Governor establishing the State's targets.

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

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 75.0 71.0

Number of Serious Injuries 330.0 302.4

Fatality Rate 1.400 1.287

Serious Injury Rate 6.000 5.332

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

60.0 55.2

Alaska DOT&PF has met all 2021 Safety Performance Targets. Two important factors related to 

Alaska's attainment of 2021 Safety Performance Targets merit clarification: serious injury data 

availability and changes in data reporting protocols.

Serious Injury Data. As noted in previous HSIP Annual Reports, while DOT&PF has provided fatality data on 

time every year, the Department has not been able to provide timely data on serious injuries for a number of 

years. This was caused by a combination of difficulties in getting crash reports from the Alaska Division of 

Motor Vehicles (which continues to experience significant and prolonged delays in data availability) and 

challenges with aspects of in-house data processing once crash reports had been received from the DMV.
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 36

Although the Department has limited options for influencing DMV processes, DOT&PF has worked 

diligently to resolve the internal issues that contributed to this multi-year backlog. In the 2021 HSIP 

Annual Report, DOT&PF provided certified serious injury data through 2017 as well as uncertified 

data for 2018 and 2019. In the past six months, DOT&PF has certified three years of crash reports 

(2018 - 2020) and has completed data entry on crash reports resulting in injury or death for 2021.

Note that the serious injury data for 2021 must undergo final QC prior to being certified. Due to the 

nature of the remaining quality control activities, which includes removal of duplicate reports, any 

changes in the data seem likely to reduce the number of serious injuries reported.

Data Reporting Protocols. Historically, DOT&PF has assembled serious injury data for HSIP Annual Reports 

by combining database queries with manual searches of crash records. Between fall 2021 and summer 2022, 

HQ Traffic and Safety staff worked with our database provider, the University of Alabama, to establish built-in 

filters tailored to HSIP reporting definitions. 

The historical search protocol required professional judgment, which by its nature changes with 

personnel, and Alaska HSIP felt that the advantages of an automated system outweighed those of a 

system that relied on manual record review, even if that was only a part of the process. The new 

protocol means that data can be compared more confidently from year to year, because the search 

queries were built on the same assumptions.

All responses in this report have been updated so that historic serious injury numbers are calculated 

based on the same filters as more recent ones. This change has resulted in minor differences, but a 

comparison of 5 years of serious injury data under the two different protocols shows an over 95% 

similarity rate.

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

11 11 9 10 9 8 16

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

19 27 29 27 26 14 25
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 36

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Benefit/Cost Ratio 

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

the State's program level evaluations. 

The overall benefit / cost ratio of Alaska's HSIP program is 6.5:1 over the last 5 years of completed projects 

with at least 3 years of post construction crash data available. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• HSIP Obligations 

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements 

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures. 

Year 2021

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* 25.2 34 0.44 0.6

Roadway Departure* 18.2 123.2 0.32 2.18

Intersections* 13.6 99.2 0.24 1.76

Pedestrians* 13 29.8 0.23 0.52

Bicyclists* 1.4 10 0.02 0.18

Older Drivers* 8.2 21.8 0.14 0.38

Motorcyclists* 6.2 31.4 0.11 0.56

Work Zones* 1.8 8 0.03 0.14

Data* 0 0 0 0
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 36

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

50

100

150

200

250

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 27 of 36

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the 

reporting period?

No

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

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

4

4.5

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 28 of 36

While DOT&PF has not established any new CRFs or conducted any formal research into their development, 

the HSIP program did conduct a proof-of-concept regression analysis of whether Improvement Types other 

than Pedestrian and Bicycle projects were providing "excess" safety benefits to Vulnerable Road Users. The 

purpose of the Implicit Safety Benefit Proof-of-Concept Study was to establish whether evidence exists that 

HSIP Improvement Categories not coded as Pedestrian or Bicycle provide unexpected safety benefits for 

Vulnerable Road Users (VRUs). Because the proof-of concept identified positive correlations, our intention is to 

attempt to quantify the strength of any safety effects through a study funded by the Alaska Department of 

Transportation and Public Facilities (DOT&PF) Research program. 
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 36

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)

16SR1 JNU Glacier 

Highway Safety 

Improvements

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadside Barrier- metal 1.00 1.00 2.00 10.51:1

16SR2 KTN N. 

Tongass Hwy. 

Delineation

Rural Minor 

Collector

Roadway 

delineation

Delineators 

post-mounted or 

on barrier

15.00 3.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 4.00 23.00 8.00 -4.11:1

06NR03 College/ 

Margaret/Antoinette 

Intersection

Urban Local 

Road or Street

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

24.00 2.00 16.00 42.00 1.24:1

08NN08 College Rd 

Right Turn Pockets

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

15.00 2.00 6.00 21.00 2.00 2.91:1

13NN04 Northern 

Region Pedestrian 

Improvements

varies Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Rapid 

Rectangular 

Flashing 

Beacons 

(RRFB)

7.00 3.00 1.00 2.00 26.00 6.00 36.00 9.00 84.99:1

13NN08 Parks 

Highway Passing 

Lanes All 5 

Locations MP 

197.5-295.5

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

28.00 14.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 15.00 6.00 48.00 21.00 0.29:1

13NR01 Parks 

highway 215-219 

Enhanced Curve 

Delination 

Fluorecent Yellow 

Signs

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

10.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 1.00 15.00 4.00 17.65:1

13NR02 Steese 

Hwy MP 18-20 

Enhanced Curve 

Delination

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

3.00 1.00 1.00 4.00 1.00 6.58:1

13NR04 

Richardson 

Highway MP 291-

295 Enhanced 

Curve Delination

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

7.00 5.00 6.00 13.00 5.00 19.59:1

14NN01 Parks Hwy 

Rest Area 5% 

Sensitivity Analysis

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

33.00 5.00 2.00 7.00 4.00 24.00 10.00 66.00 19.00 3.26:1
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 36

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)

14NN02 Parks MP 

321 Dynamic 

Speed Sign - 100% 

Sensitivity Analysis

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Speed 

management

Dynamic Speed 

Feedback Signs

3.00 1.00 1.00 5.00 25.4:1

14NR03 Alaska 

Hwy Curve 

delination and 

Pass/ No-Pass 

Upgrades

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

20.00 2.00 3.00 2.00 3.00 11.00 3.00 36.00 8.00 6.06:1

14NR04 

Richardson 

highway edgline 

Rumble Strips

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder

6.00 16.00 1.00 6.00 16.00 3.00 29.00 19.00 23.07:1

14NR05 CHSR 

Safety 

Improvements

varies Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

23.00 6.00 2.00 1.00 3.00 14.00 1.00 42.00 8.00 28.01:1

14NR06 Fairbanks 

Area Signing and 

Striping

varies Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

52.00 9.00 4.00 2.00 5.00 5.00 43.00 11.00 104.00 27.00 -7.31:1

14NR07 Parks Hwy 

Signing and 

Striping

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

72.00 15.00 2.00 1.00 11.00 3.00 31.00 9.00 116.00 28.00 65.52:1

14NR09 Copper 

River Highway 

Signing and 

Striping

Rural Major 

Collector

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

1.00 3.00 5.00 1.00 6.00 4.00 19.48:1

01CR10 36th 

Avenue: Arctic 

Boulevard to C 

Street 5 Lane 

Conversion

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

12.00 5.00 17.00 0.93:1

08CR04 16th 

Avenue @ A Street 

Channelization 

Improvements

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

Intersection 

geometry

Splitter island – 

install on one or 

more 

approaches

11.00 2.00 3.00 10.00 4.00 24.00 6.00 10.84:1

12CR03 DeArmoun 

Road & Elmore 

Road Intersection 

Improvements

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

7.00 1.00 2.00 8.00 2.00 -1.35:1

12CR05 Turpin St 

@ Boundary/Front 

age Access rd. 

Intersection 

Improvements

Urban Major 

Collector

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

5.00 5.00 2.00 7.00 7.00 12.00 -22.7:1
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 36

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)

13CR02 Muldoon 

Road 

Channelization 

Improvements, 11th 

Court to Boundary 

Ave

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

Access 

management

Median 

crossover - 

relocate/close 

crossover

38.00 4.00 25.00 67.00 7.27:1

13CR03 Parks 

Highway and 

Petersville Road 

intersection 

Improvements

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

2.00 1.00 3.00 11.96:1

13CR04 Sterling 

Highway and North 

Fork road (Anchor 

Point) Intersection 

Improvements

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

4.00 2.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 3.00 2.55:1

13CR05 Pioneer 

Avenue and Main 

Street (Homer) 

Intersection 

Improvements

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

two-way stop to 

all-way stop

2.00 1.00 1.00 3.00 1.00 -0.21:1

13CR06 O'Malley 

Rd and Elmore Rd 

Intersection 

Improvements

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

4.00 2.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 -6.82:1

13CR07 Bogard 

Road @ Seldon 

Road Intersection 

Improvements

Urban Minor 

Arterial

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

flashers –signmounted or 

overhead

2.00 1.00 1.00 2.00 4.00 2.00 -24.96:1

13CR08 Glenn 

Highway 

Continuous 

Lighting, MP 27-31

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Lighting Continuous 

roadway lighting

43.00 17.00 1.00 1.00 16.00 6.00 61.00 23.00 0.92:1

14CR03 Seward 

Passing Lanes 99-

100

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

5.00 4.00 1.00 6.00 1.00 12.00 5.00 1.14:1

14CR05 CR 

Flashing Yellow 

Arrow Project

varies Intersection 

traffic control

Modify traffic 

signal – add 

flashing yellow 

arrow

81.00 31.00 3.00 2.00 37.00 22.00 121.00 55.00 1.6:1
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 36

Compliance Assessment

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

 01/21/2019

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2018 To: 2022

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

 2023

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 75

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]

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100 100 100
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 36

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]

60 60

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100 80

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]

Location Identifier 

for Road 1 Crossing 

Point (122) [112]

Location Identifier 

for Road 2 Crossing 

Point (123) [113]

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126) 

[116]

30 30

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 

100 100
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 36

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]

Roadway Type at 

End Ramp Terminal 

(199) [189]

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): 92.22 92.22 28.75 28.75 63.64 63.64 100.00 95.00 100.00 100.00

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

The AKDOT team did not add or modify the percent complete values on any of the FDEs. The vast majority of the incomplete FDEs are associated with intersections or interchanges/ramps. Esri, our GIS software provider, has changed 

the way that they model intersections in their LRS-based GIS product, Roads and Highways (R&H). Esri’s change will require us to redesign how we manage intersections and interchanges/ramps. 

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. 

1. Work with the Department’s Safety staff to prioritize the modeling of the FDEs 2. Contract with Esri to model the FDEs to: o Develop a practical and useful route segment definition o Identify and address overlapping data needs, such 

as MIRE and the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) o Align the intersection and interchange/ramp features with Esri’s new R&H intersections o Support overlapping data needs
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 36

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

L_8-31-22 HSIP Ann Report Cover.pdf

hsip_handbook 2022.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2022 Alaska Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 36

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.