Alabama

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2016 Annual Report

Prepared by: AL
ii

Disclaimer

Protection of Data from Discovery & Admission into Evidence

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

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

subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered 

for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or 

addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or other data.” 

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

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

enhancement of potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway 

crossings, pursuant to sections 130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any 

highway safety construction improvement project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid 

highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State 

court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any 

occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data.”
iii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary....................................................................................................................................... 1

Introduction .................................................................................................................................................. 3

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................ 4

Program Administration ........................................................................................................................... 4

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

Progress in Implementing Projects............................................................................................................. 19

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 19

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 22

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets .................................................................................... 35

Overview of General Safety Trends........................................................................................................ 35

Application of Special Rules.................................................................................................................... 46

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................48

SHSP Emphasis Areas.............................................................................................................................. 49

Groups of similar project types............................................................................................................... 51

Systemic Treatments............................................................................................................................... 54

Project Evaluation....................................................................................................................................... 59

Glossary....................................................................................................................................................... 63
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

The Alabama Department of Transportation (ALDOT) through the Design Bureau, Traffic Design Division, 

and Traffic & Safety Operations Section (TSOS) is responsible for the administration of the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The goal for the TSOS is to provide the tools, processes and 

guidance necessary to promote highway safety efforts that lead to a reduction in the number and 

severity of crashes on all public roads in Alabama. 

The HSIP projects are consistent with the Alabama Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) 2nd Edition, 

version 2012. The SHSP is scheduled to be updated in 2017. The next version of the Alabama SHSP will 

focus on implementing regional SHSPs following the Rural/Regional Planning Organizations (RPOs) as the 

geographical boundaries for each region. Specific emphasis areas will be identified by local stakeholders 

to develop performance measures with proven countermeasures. 

The current focus of Alabama’s SHSP is the “Toward Zero Deaths” initiative. Additionally, Alabama has 

adopted the goal of reducing fatalities by 50% within a 20-year time period. Fatal crashes had dropped 

significantly over the past decade from 2003 to 2012. Alabama had seen a steady decline in the number 

of fatalities and the fatality rate during this same period, but has recently seen an uptick in fatalities 

over the past couple of years. 

The SHSP has five key focus areas: Driver Behavior, Infrastructure Countermeasures, Legislative

Initiatives, Traffic Safety Information Systems and Safety Stakeholders Community. The SHSP was 

developed in conjunction with the Alabama Department of Economic and Communities Affairs (ADECA) 

and multiple agencies and organizations. ADECA is responsible for the implementation of the National 

Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) programs. The human behavioral aspects of the SHSP 

incorporate ADECA’S Statewide Highway Safety Plan which addresses the safety program behavioral 

elements related to occupant restraint use, impaired driving, distracted driving, speed, young drivers, 

motorcycles, and pedestrians. 

HSIP projects have focused on the three (3) areas: Infrastructure Countermeasures 

(construction/supportive programs), Driver Behavior (safety outreach campaigns and overtime 

enforcement efforts), and Traffic Safety Information Systems (crash data analysis). 

HSIP Infrastructure projects are developed through safety and operational analysis using crash data 

statistics, crash patterns, and benefit-cost engineering analysis. The projects have been more systemic in 

recent years and target more specific needs identified through data analysis such as Interstate Median 

Barrier, Shoulder Widening Program, Rumble Strips, and Horizontal Curve Safety Programs.

HSIP Infrastructure Projects/Tool Development

The Interstate Median Barrier program and the Shoulder Widening Program are safety programs which 

were established in 2002 and 2006, respectively. The Interstate Median Barrier program addresses 
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

median cross over crashes by installing median cable along selected sections of interstate with a high 

pattern of median cross over crashes. The shoulder widening program addresses the addition of two (2) 

feet of shoulder during maintenance resurfacing along state routes (where feasible). 

In 2015, the Horizontal Curve Safety Program (HCSP) was the next systemic HSIP project developed and 

implemented. This program is evaluating horizontal curves on state maintained roads and is developing 

recommendations for traffic signing and pavement marking in accordance with the MUTCD 2009. In 

addition, high crash sites and roadway departure locations are undergoing road safety assessments 

(RSAs) to determine appropriate safety enhancements and countermeasures. 

TSOS collaborates with various University Research Centers to identify and develop data and analytical 

tools and manuals such as ALSAFE: Development of an Alabama Specific Planning Level Safety Tool, and 

the Alabama Roundabout Guide. 

ALSAFE will be a safety forecasting tool for analysis at the Traffic Analysis Zone level which is a common 

metric used by planners. ALSAFE will be a statewide planning level safety software tool which will aid 

ALDOT, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), and Regional Planning Organizations 

(RPOs). These tools will be vital in the planning and selection process of addressing potential safety 

problems and countermeasures for human factors or needs that are identified

In the past few years, Alabama has been implementing conceptual designs for roundabouts. In order to 

maintain design consistency and to provide guidance, there was a need for the development of guidance 

for Alabama roundabouts. The Alabama Roundabout Guide will serve as a guide to the planning, design, 

construction, operation, and maintenance of roundabouts in Alabama. 

Alabama is developing a process and procedures to implement the Highway Safety Manual (HSM) to 

provide a tool to assist in selecting and evaluating safety projects. The Center for Advanced Public Safety 

(CAPS) is contracted to develop Safety Performance Factors (SPF) for state route segments and 

intersections while the University of South Alabama has a project to develop SPFs for rural roads. The 

SPFs will be specific for Alabama by applying Highway Safety Manual (HSM) methodology during their 

development. By using these tools, the project selection and evaluation process will be enhanced. 

Local Roads

Local roads safety programs are included in the HSIP program of projects. The Alabama Local Technical 

Assistance Program (LTAP) through Auburn University provides both training and practical application of 

safety principles to educate local entities. Other tools and equipment, such as the HSIP Manual provides 

guidance on how to apply for HSIP funds.

TSOS in conjunction with FHWA also hosted the first annual Rural Road Safety Conference in 2014, with 

the 3rd conference completed in October, 2017. The Conference focuses on local safety issues and 

provided training on various roadway safety topics.
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

Non-Infrastructure Safety Efforts

Non-Infrastructure Safety Efforts of Driver Behavior and Traffic Safety Information Systems areas of 

Alabama’s current SHSP are managed by the Design Bureau, Traffic Design Division, Safety Management 

Section (SMS) 

Law enforcement agencies are invited to participate in HSIP development committees such as the 

development of the Speed Management Manual and Road Safety Assessments (RSA) Manual. Their 

perspective and experience plays an important role in targeting effective countermeasures for the safety 

of the traveling public. 

Safety outreach initiatives are coordinated with the ALDOT's Media and Community Relations 

Bureau, the Alabama State Law Enforcement Agency (formerly the Alabama Department of Public 

Safety), and ADECA. “Driver Sober or Get Pulled Over”, “Click It or Ticket it” and “Work Zone Safety” are 

examples of the safety campaigns implemented annually. This partnership is effective in providing 

safety information to the public. Its focus is to reduce the number of fatalities and serious injuries that 

occur, especially during various holiday seasons. 

ALDOT Media and Community Relations conducted a safety public education and awareness program 

that addressed the behavioral safety elements related to seatbelts, speeding, impaired and distracted 

driving, work zones, rail crossings and motorcycles. Working with the Governor’s 

Office, May was proclaimed Motorcycle Safety Awareness Month, and July was proclaimed Distracted 

Driving Awareness Month by Alabama Governor Robert Bentley. Using varied communication channels 

and events, the ALDOT public education programs reached across the state of Alabama and generated 

news articles, advertisements and other marketing pieces that were viewed by our target audiences 

more than 35 million times. 

Alabama crash data is maintained and accessed through the Critical Analysis Reporting Environment 

(CARE) software and its supporting data is maintained by the Center for Advanced Public Safety (CAPS) 

at the University of Alabama. This interface is used for crash analysis by both ALDOT and local agencies. 

This data system is used to assist in the preparation of this report as well as the 

SHSP. The CARE program is critical in the development of the HSIP for assessing safety information. 

ALDOT has made great strides to develop and implement safety programs and provide public awareness 

but more efforts are needed to continue the efforts to meet the “Toward Zero Death” Initiatives. This is 

a corporative effort through partnerships with other agencies and addressing safety elements through 

the SHSP to reduce fatalities and serious injuries throughout the state of Alabama. 

Introduction
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

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 MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Local Roads are addressed through the HSIP by using crash data analysis and safety and operations 

analysis. Alabama is proactive in the development of safety tools and manuals for use of the analysis of 

local roads. 

ALDOT has updated the HSIP Manual which provides an overview of the HSIP program. This manual 

provides aid for local agencies, MPOs/RPOs, and local ALDOT Region Personnel with a focus on the 

eligibility and funding requirements for HSIP projects. HSIP funds are available to local agencies for low 

cost safety improvements such as striping, markings, signage, traffic signal upgrades, etc. Project 

selections are based upon a benefit to cost analysis. Training has been provided on the HSIP manual and 

HSIP application process.

Other local tools under development are the United States Road Assessment Program (usRAP). usRAP is 

intended to encourage highway agencies to make safety decisions in the management of road networks 

based on national assessment of risk as well as to develop roadway Star Ratings and Safer Road 

Investment Plans. usRAP can be used for risk mapping of crashes, safety performance tracking, and 

provides a star rating (based on inspection of roads to examine how well they protect used from 

involvement in crashes and from deaths and serious injuries when crashes occur.)

The development of Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) for rural two-lane roads of the HSM will assist 

in the analysis process for local roads. ALDOT developed a Road Safety Assessments (RSAs) program. A 
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

RSA is a formal safety performance examination of existing and proposed roadways by an independent 

and multi-disciplinary team. This program will be available to both state and local government projects. 

ALDOT's Safety Management Section (SMS) provides cities, counties and other municipalities with 

annual crash data summaries, high crash information locations, individual crash reports, and other 

crash-related information as needed. This crash data provides information to help identify immediate or 

potential safety needs. This data is also helpful in the selection process for safety program funding.

State and local agency personnel are presented opportunities to receive crash analysis training for the 

Critical Analysis Reporting Environment (CARE) program. CARE provides an analytical process to assess 

crash data for trends and use as needed. CARE training is provided several times during the year.

In September 2014, ALDOT in cooperation with FHWA and LTAP hosted its first annual Local Rural Road 

Safety Workshop and Conference. Subsequent to this first conference, we have had two additional 

conferences that have emphasized the implementation of the safety process through all stages of 

roadway planning, design and operations through practical guidance specifically geared to local/rural 

roads. We have averaged 125 participants per conference who have learned from various subject 

matter experts including the Road Safety 365 workshop, which was a one-day training session designed 

to provide local and rural agencies with practical and effective ways to implement safety solutions into 

their day-to-day activities and project development process. Participants also learned how to use the 

CARE system, to develop countermeasures for Stop-Controlled Intersections, Work Zone Safety for Local 

Roads, etc. The workshop and conference was very successful. 

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Other-ALDOT County Transportation

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

Traffic & Safety Operations Section (TSOS) has several safety program partnerships with the 

ALDOT Maintenance Bureau. The initial safety program was developed between the TSOS and 

ALDOT's Maintenance Bureau to implement the statewide shoulder widening projects on 

resurfacing projects. The program addresses road departure crashes along rural state routes. 

This program coordinates with the state’s resurfacing program and provides two (2’) foot 

shoulders along routes with shoulder scoring, where feasible. HSIP funds are utilized to 

implement the improvements. The ALDOT Maintenance Bureau administers the program and 

assists TSOS in the identification of state routes that are being widened. 

Additionally, ALDOT's Maintenance Bureau has been given the task of upgrading signage to 

meet the current MUTCD (Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices). As an effort to improve 
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

safety, TSOS is collaborating by identifying high crash horizontal curve locations for enhanced 

signage upgrades. HSIP funding will be used to implement this portion of the overall program.

In 2012, TSOS initiated a pilot project for a potential statewide inventory of traffic control 

devices at signalized intersections. The pilot provided a mixture of urban and rural collections of 

traffic data inventory. The purpose of this study would be to collect data at each location for 

both the TSOS and the ALDOT Maintenance Bureau. TSOS is using this database to develop 

Safety Performance Functions (SPFs) for use with the Highway Safety Manual. Additionally, the 

Maintenance Bureau will be using the data to advance maintenance, operations, and financial 

management of the State's Traffic Signal Inventory. The project has now expanded statewide 

and ALDOT Computer Services will develop a database for the use of ALDOT Region personnel 

also. To date, approximately 1/3 of the signalized intersections along the state-maintained 

system have been inventoried.

TSOS has had other similar partnerships with ALDOT’s County Transportation Bureau. This 

partnership was initially developed with the High Risk Rural Roads Program (HRRRP) and has 

expanded. Now ALDOT’s County Transportation Bureau is active in the HSIP review committee 

of county applications and provides valid input on the development of other efforts to educate 

locals on safety issues. For instance, ALDOT’s County Transportation Bureau assisted and 

participated in the Local Rural Roads Conference which was held in September 2014 and has 

been actively involved in subsequent conferences. This "hands on" approach has been 

successful in addressing Alabama's local roads safety needs and is beneficial in obligating HRRR 

and HSIP funds. 

Another essential partnership is with the ALDOT’s development of an Enterprise GIS (EGIS) 

system. ALDOT’s Enterprise GIS (EGIS) is comprised of a Linear Referencing System for all the 

roads in the state of Alabama and its associated data attributes. EGIS’s primary function has 

been to help process inventory data required for FHWA’s Highway Performance Monitoring 

System’s (HPMS) submittal. TSOS has a representative on the EGIS committee who gives a 

perspective on Safety Data related needs. TSOS has submitted an extensive list of Model 

Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) data elements to the committee for consideration in 

the ALDOT’s Light Detection and Ranging (LIDAR) data collection process. 

Also, ALDOT is converting its current Link-Node system to GPS coordinates. Theses coordinates 

will be put into the CARE system and will allow past crash reports to have a GPS coordinate. The 

University of Alabama is leading this project and were initially tasked with translating ALDOT’s 

digital copies of the Link Node maps drawn in MicroStation into a GIS format. Now that ALDOT’s 

Enterprise GIS (EGIS) Linear Referencing System (LRS) has come into being, the university has 

been tasked with conflating the Link Node data to the new LRS system. Four counties have 

been selected for the development of the conflation process and then the university will then 

complete the final 63 counties. Lastly, the university has also been charged with developing an 

interactive Viewer/Editing program for the Links and Nodes and future changes to the data. 
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other-County and Local Govt

Other-Ala Dept of Public Health

Other-Ala Dept of Public Safety

Other-Ala Dept of Education

Other-Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Other-Pending Development of SPFs/CMFs for use of HSM

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

Traffic & Safety Operations Section's vision is to develop and provide tools, processes, and guidance 

necessary to focus on reducing the number and severity of crashes for all public roads in Alabama. TSOS 

provides infrastructure road safety initiatives and strategies and provides rapid review, response, and 

resolution to roadway safety concerns.

TSOS administers the HSIP program by developing innovative and progressive programs consistent with 

the Alabama Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The programs are planned by fiscal year with 

available HSIP funding. TSOS works closely with the FHWA Division Office Safety personnel to expedite 

obligating HSIP funds in a timely manner.

Implementing a proactive approach in administration, planning and coordinating HSIP projects, TSOS 

manages HSIP funds in a more progressive manner. 

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 

Median Barrier Intersection Horizontal Curve

Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways Skid Hazard
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Crash Data Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety

Shoulder Improvement Segments

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 7/29/2003

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Median width

Functional classification

Roadside features

Other-Use of HSM methodology

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Probability of specific crash types

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Crash Analysis

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 50

Projects are ranked by priority 50

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2000
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

 

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

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Safety and Operations Analysis

Other-ALDOT Region selection of Candidates

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: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2012

 

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
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects 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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding 50

Ranking based on net benefit 50

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Recently authorization project for Vulnerable Users Handbook

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
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal crashes only

Traffic

Volume

Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Roadside features

Other-No of lanes

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects 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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Ranking based on B/C 50

Available funding 50

Program: Skid Hazard

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2013

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Traffic

Volume

Horizontal curvature
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Lane miles Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Program is being developed

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

Available funding 50

Cost Effectiveness 50

Program: Crash Data

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/1996

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal crashes only

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Traffic

Volume

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Use of the CARE system
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

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

Data Available Statewide 100

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Traffic

Volume

Horizontal curvature

Lane miles Roadside features

Other-Existing Shoulder if 

applicable

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

selection committee

Other-In conjunction with Resurfacing Maintenance Program

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

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

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

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

Relative Weight in Scoring

Available funding 50

Cost Effectiveness 50
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/1993

 

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

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects 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 50

Available funding 50

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Horizontal curvature

Functional classification

Roadside features
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-HRRRP

Other-MUTCD REQUIREMENT

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

Cost Effectiveness 2

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 2/1/2006

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Volume Functional classification

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

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

Yes

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

selection committee
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

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 25

Available funding 50

Cost Effectiveness 25

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 1/1/2014

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic

Volume

Functional classification

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Other-Recently authorized project_Vulnerable User Handbook

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

Program: Shoulder Improvement

Date of Program Methodology: 1/2/2006
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

Traffic

Volume

Horizontal curvature

Lane miles Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

No

How are highway safety improvement projects 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

Cost Effectiveness 2

Program: Segments

Date of Program Methodology: 1/3/1993

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes

Fatal crashes only

Traffic

Volume

Median width

Horizontal curvature

Functional classification

Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

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

Yes
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

Other-RANKING

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

Available funding 50

Cost Effectiveness 50

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 

50%

Highway safety improvement program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements?

Cable Median Barriers

Rumble Strips

Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing

Clear Zone Improvements

Other-Horizontal Curve Signing and Marking Program

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.

Systemic Approach

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

TSOS’ methodology for development of the HSIP Programs is directly related to the correlation 

with the goals and elements in the Alabama Strategic Highway Safety Plan. Program elements 

are focused toward reducing the number of fatalities and severe injuries in Alabama. 

ALDOT is making great strides toward implementing more systemic programs and providing 

safety tools for analysis for within the department as well as external partners. The goal for the 

updated SHSP is to target more local entities to assist in the TZD initiative for the state.

Progress in Implementing Projects

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) $21,922,741.00 3 % $7,677,341.77 1 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) $0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

HRRR Special Rule $0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

$0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

$0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

$0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

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

$4,931,606.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$4,931,606.00

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

$8,622,000.00

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

$8,622,000.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

period?

$21,813,412.00

Incentive Grants (Section 

406)

$0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STP, NHPP)

$724,358,988.00 97 % $721,505,794.05 99 %

State and Local Funds $0.00 0 % $0.00 0 %

Totals $746,281,729.00 100% $729,183,135.82 100%
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

At this time, there are no obligation impediments of HSIP funds in Alabama.

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

None at this time.
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improveme

nt Category 

Output HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Fundin

g 

Catego

ry

Functional 

Classificati

on

AAD

T

Spee

d

Roadwa

y 

Ownersh

ip

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strate

gy

Traffic Signal 

Inventory ServicesStatewide (Phase

Noninfrastructu

re 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

888577 888577 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

ALDOT Safety Data 

access, sharing, 

display study

Noninfrastructu

re 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

203867 203867 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

Dvlpmnt of Rdwy 

Congestion/Safety 

Improvement Tool

Noninfrastructu

re 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

0 294890 Penalty 

Transfe

r -

Section 

154

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

FY16 Safety Outreach 

Program

Noninfrastructu

re 

Educational 

efforts

1 

Numbe

rs

1000000 1000000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Education

Dvlpmnt of Highway 

Safety Workforce in 

AL Phase II

Noninfrastructu

re Training 

1 

Numbe

rs

281673 281673 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Education
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

and 

workforce 

developmen

t

ALDOT and ALEA 

Overtime 

Enforcement Efforts 

FY16

Noninfrastructu

re Noninfrastructu

re - other

1 

Numbe

rs

1500000 1500000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Enforcemen

t

Development of AL 

Vulnerable Road 

Users Handbook

Noninfrastructu

re 

Transportati

on safety 

planning

1 

Numbe

rs

315502.

97

315502.9

7

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Planning for 

all road 

users, 

including 

pedestrians

, bicyclists, 

and drivers

Wet Pavement 

Analysis Study

Noninfrastructu

re 

Data/traffic 

records

1 

Numbe

rs

86220 301267 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

Horizontal Curves 

Safety Program (N, 

E.C., and W.C

Noninfrastructu

re 

Transportati

on safety 

planning

1 

Numbe

rs

1000000 1000000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

Horizontal Curves 

Safety Program (E.C., 

SW, and SE

Noninfrastructu

re 

Transportati

on safety 

1 

Numbe

rs

1000000 1000000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

planning

Statewide Highway 

Safety Improvement 

Program

Noninfrastructu

re 

Transportati

on safety 

planning

1 

Numbe

rs

1050400 1050400 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR8 MP236.66 to 

MP250.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

14.04 

Miles

897506 4986198.

64

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurfacing/2' Safety 

Widen SR-25 MP 232 

to MP 236

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

4.2 

Miles

268921 2444734 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e.

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR117 MP 38.27 to MP 

50

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

11.89 

Miles

1054378 6202223.

51

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR1 MP 286.55 to MP 

290

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

3.97 

Miles

284752 2588656.

63

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

other STP, 

NHPP)

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-3 MP 

312.652 to MP 31

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

4.558 

Miles

446548 4961644.

35

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Roundabout 

Feasibility Study in 

North Region (3 lo

Intersection 

traffic 

control 

Modify 

control -

modificatio

ns to 

roundabout

3 

Numbe

rs

0 90000 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR144 MP 0 to MP 

10.16

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

10.16 

Miles

515660 3033295.

25

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Sfty 

Wdn/Rsrfc/prm trffc 

stripe SR-25 MP 

130.53

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

7.82 

Miles

372753 1589103 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Multi Safety 

Improvements SR-4 

MP 111.91 to MP 114

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

2.83 

Miles

176151 2516439.

24

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Urban 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Multiple 

Safety 

Improveme
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

shoulder -

paved or 

other

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

nts

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR53 MP 253.99 to MP 

26

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

8.64 

Miles

511590 4263254.

4

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-9 MP 

230.170 to MP 23

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

8.059 

Miles

454114 3027625.

26

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Interstate Median 

Barrier I-85 from Exit 

50 to GA 

Roadside 

Barrier -

other

30.3 

Miles

750380 2273878.

74

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-1 MP 

158.446 to 161.6

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

3.194 

Miles

205801 1286256.

11

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-21 MP 

Shoulder 

treatments 

5.738 

Miles

482170 2055568 Other 

Federal

Rural 

Minor 

0 0 State 

Highway 

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

236.262 to MP 2 Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Arterial Agency

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-63 and SR22

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

11.997 

Miles

1067493 5211878 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-22 MP 

144.057-153.094

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.037 

Miles

893402 4702115.

43

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-1 MP 

203.849-MP 212.2

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

8.372 

Miles

584298 3437047.

83

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-48 MP 

15.682 to MP 25

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.555 

Miles

773503 3867513.

5

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-1 MP 

192.623-MP 195.4

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

2.847 

Miles

315935 1579677.

44

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widening SR-275 MP 

0.378-MP 3.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

2.695 

Miles

214601 1216075 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/Safety 

Widen SR-25 MP 

70.74 to MP 84.73

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

14.03 

Miles

1021841 6010831.

5

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Plane/Resurface/2' 

Safety Widening SR289 MP 0 - 1

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

1.2 

Miles

31718 1025544 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Intrsctn Sfty Impr. 

5th St.+SR-13, Main 

Ave-->Brid

Intersection 

geometry 

Intersection 

geometry -

other

1 

Numbe

rs

400000 400000 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Intersection

s
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

Guardrail Installation 

I-85 MP 3.3 to MP

8.5

Roadside 

Barriermetal

5.2 

Miles

5200 15600 Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure

Resurface/Safety 

Widen SR-8 MP 

174.667 to MP 181.2

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

6.601 

Miles

356895 3568945.

83

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-15 MP 

172.074-MP 176.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

4.235 

Miles

384547 2563645.

19

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Planing/Resurface/2' 

Sfty Widen SR-3 

MP119.972--12

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

5.478 

Miles

447794 2798710.

21

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-106 MP 

14.827 to MP 2

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

5.803 

Miles

418837 2792246.

57

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

NHPP)

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-6 MP 165.8 

to MP 166.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

7.773 

Miles

539455 4495457.

56

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Widen 

SR-63 MP 6.7 to MP 

16.311

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.611 

Miles

447833 2985552.

8

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Roadside Hardware 

Assessment Pilot 

Program

Roadside 

Roadside -

other

1 

Numbe

rs

418771 418771 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

N/A 0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Data

Guardrail Installation 

on I-85 MP 3.3 to MP 

6.4

Roadside 

Barriermetal

3.1 

Miles

98164 98163.75 HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Safety ProjectCorrect Cross Slope 

SR-1 MP 50.10--

Roadway 

Superelevati

on / cross 

slope

0.191 

Miles

331513 331512.6

4

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Geometry

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-131 MP 

17.9 to MP 27.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.225 

Miles

734307 3496699.

86

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-131 MP 

8.052 to MP 17

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.848 

Miles

855688 3565364.

71

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-122 MP 0 

to MP 3.777

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

3.777 

Miles

223872 1865597.

69

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-239 MP 

2.166 to MP 7.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

4.972 

Miles

450826 2817661.

67

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-125 MP 

13.58 to MP 19

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

5.795 

Miles

456613 2536739.

84

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-93 MP 

2.783 to MP 8.3

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

5.608 

Miles

433841 1807669.

75

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

32

NHPP)

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-201 MP 

0.02 to MP 1.5

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

1.517 

Miles

408102 536976.1

5

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-12 MP 

127.327--131.62

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

4.4 

Miles

69809 3490429.

79

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-27 MP 

36.661 to MP 44

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

7.993 

Miles

621159 2484637.

84

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Resurface/2' Safety 

Widen SR-52 MP 

65.14 to MP 74.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.389 

Miles

689276 2996853.

2

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Urban 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Sfty 

Widen/Planing/Resu

rface SR-10 

MP45.695--53

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

7.804 

Miles

558405 2233619.

09

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

33

paved or 

other

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR69 MP 48.63 to MP 

54.

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

5.815 

Miles

424528 1463888.

38

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR21 MP 71.947 to MP 

78

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

7 Miles 627912 2511649.

54

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurface SR12 MP 28.065 to MP 

36

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

8.09 

Miles

640839 2288710.

63

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Sfty 

Widen/Planing/Resu

rface SR-164 MP 

0.092--2

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

2.459 

Miles

126041 787753.6

5

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Major 

Collector

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Safety 

Widen/Resurfacing 

SR-221 MP 0.030 to 

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

1.814 

Miles

124289 690493.8

6

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Rural 

Minor 

Arterial

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

MP shoulder -

paved or 

other

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

2' Sfty 

Widen/Planing/Resu

rface SR-5 MP 

11.240--21

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

9.959 

Miles

847639 3027283.

22

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

2' Sfty 

Widen/Planing/Resu

rface SR-5 MP 

21.199--28

Shoulder 

treatments 

Widen 

shoulder -

paved or 

other

6.882 

Miles

545220 2180881.

55

Other 

Federal

-aid 

Funds 

(i.e. 

STP, 

NHPP)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Lane 

Departure

Guide Rail 

Installation I-59 MP 

27.292 to MP 55.35

Roadside 

Barrier -

cable

28.06 

Miles

388294 388294.4

1

HSIP 

(Sectio

n 148)

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Interstate

0 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Roadway 

Departure
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015

Number of fatalities 937 888 864 859 856

Number of serious injuries 15705 12949 10609 9174 8788

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.51 1.41 1.35 1.32 1.3

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 25.26 20.59 16.57 14.11 13.32

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

37
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

38

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2015

Function Classification Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

44 357

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

1 8

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

108 877

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

108 877

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

31 252

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

133 1080

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

55 447

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

43 482
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

39

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

88 987

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

88 987

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

64 718

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

5 56

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

21 236
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

40
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

41
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

42

Year - 2014

Roadway Ownership Number of 

fatalities

Number of serious 

injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY AGENCY 480 7971

COUNTY HIGHWAY AGENCY 261 2449

CITY OF MUNICIPAL HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

113 1997
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

43
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

46

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate.

Alabama has had a steady decline in both the number of fatalities and the number of serious injuries. 

This year's report shows a continuing decline also. 

Alabama is still incorporating highway functional class into the crash data system administered through 

the CARE system. The rolling average for 2015 was calculated for this report. However the rate of 

fatalities and serious injuries for highway functional classification and/or roadway classification is still 

not available

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.16 0.15

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

2.05 1.74 1.43 1.21 1.14

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

2.2 1.89 1.58 1.37 1.3

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.

The number of fatalities for drivers and pedestrians 65 years of age and older from the FARS annual 

Report File and the number of serious injuries from Alabama’s CARE system are added together. That 

amount is then divided by the number of people in Alabama who are 65 years of age and older 

compared to the total State population to determine the rate for that particular year, i.e. 2005.

Example: For 2005: (No. of Fatalities + No. of Serious Injuries) = Total of Older Driver and Pedestrians 

for 2005

 Total of Older Drivers and Pedestrians for 2005 / 2005 older population =RATE FOR 2005

In order to calculate the 5 year rolling averages, each rate of fatalities and serious injuries was calculated 

for each year 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013. Then a 5 year rolling average is 

calculated as below.
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

47

Example:

(2005 RATE) + (2006 RATE)+ (2007 RATE) +(2008 RATE) +(2009 RATE) /5= ROLLING AVERAGE FOR 2009

(2006 RATE) + (2007 RATE)+ (2008 RATE) +(2009 RATE) +(2010 RATE) /5= ROLLING AVERAGE FOR 2010

(2007 RATE) + (2008 RATE) + (2009 RATE) +(2010 RATE) +(2011 RATE) /5= ROLLING AVERAGE FOR 2011

(2008 RATE) + (2009 RATE) + (2010 RATE) +(2011 RATE) +(2012 RATE) /5= ROLLING AVERAGE FOR 2012

(2009 RATE) + (2010 RATE) + (2011 RATE) +(2012 RATE) +(2013 RATE) /5= ROLLING AVERAGE FOR 2013
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

48

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

Benefit/cost

If 'benefit/cost', indicate the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program benefit/cost ratio.

Varies by project type.

A Benefit/Cost ratio is assigned to all non-systemic projects. This ratio is calculated using the ALDOT HSIP 

spreadsheet and is used to determine if a project will move forward with safety funds, be denied 

funding, or be split funded in some cases. The current minimum B/C ratio is 1.0, but may be moved 

higher as more projects are submitted for HSIP funding.

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

None

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 

No significant program changes have occurred since the last report.
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

49

SHSP Emphasis Areas

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2015

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Roadway Departure Run-off-road 391 3457

Intersections Intersections 239 3650

Older Drivers All 106 784

Data All 857 8540
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

50
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

Groups of similar project types
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2015

HSIP Subprogram TypesTarget Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Roadway 

Departure

STATE 

ROUTE_ROR

76 744

Median Barrier Interstate Median 

Barrier

6 22

Crash Data All 849 8540

Intersection All 239 3650
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

53
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

54

Systemic Treatments
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

55

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.

Year - 2014

Systemic improvement Target Crash 

Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate 

(per HMVMT)

Serious injury 

rate (per 

HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Cable Median Barriers Interstate 

Median Barrier

10 27

Pavement/Shoulder 

Widening

State Routes 87 601
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

56
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

57
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

ALDOT has been integrating the Highway Safety Manual (HSM), Critical Analysis Report Environment 

(CARE), GIS and roadway inventory into the various safety programs to improve safety data collection 

and analysis. There is also a study nearing completion on "Integrating Safety and Operations into 

Planning, Design, Construction, and Post Construction Operations." This study includes research 

methodology and data collection, creates an environment for integrating operations and safety into 

multimodal planning efforts, reviews statewide, regional, corridor and sub-areas opportunities, then will 

conclude with a final workshop and study documentations. 
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

Project Evaluation

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

Bef-All 

Injuries

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

Aft-All 

Injuries

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

AL-10 from 

MP 46.69 

to MP 

53.49

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

1 1 2 2

AL-69 from 

MP 48.63 

to MP 

54.45

Rural Major 

Collector

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

2 2 2 2
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

AL-21 from 

MP 71.94 

to MP 

78.95

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

1 1 1 3 1 1 2

AL-12 from 

MP 28.06 

to MP 

36.16

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

1 6 7

AL-164 

from MP 

0.09 to MP 

2.55

Rural Major 

Collector

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

2 2

AL-221 

from MP 

0.03 to MP 

1.85

Rural Minor 

Arterial

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

1 1 2
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

61

AL-5 from 

MP 11.24 

to MP 

21.12

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

4 4

AL-5 from 

MP 21.19 

to MP 

28.08

Multiple 

Functional 

Classes

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder 

- paved or other

2 6 6 14

AL-1 from 

MP 50.1 to 

MP 50.29

Rural 

Principal 

Arterial -

Other

Roadway Superelevation / 

cross slope
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached
2016 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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.