Page 1 of 52

ALABAMA 

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 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 52

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 .......................................................................................................................8

Project Implementation .......................................................................................................................21

Funds Programmed .........................................................................................................................21

General Listing of Projects ..............................................................................................................23

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................34

General Highway Safety Trends ......................................................................................................34

Safety Performance Targets............................................................................................................39

Applicability of Special Rules ...........................................................................................................41

Evaluation ...........................................................................................................................................43

Program Effectiveness ....................................................................................................................43

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements .......................................................43

Project Effectiveness .......................................................................................................................47

Compliance Assessment.....................................................................................................................48

Optional Attachments ..........................................................................................................................51

Glossary ..............................................................................................................................................52
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 52

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 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 52

Executive Summary

The Traffic & Safety Operations section (TSOS) within the ALDOT Design Bureau is responsible for managing 

the Highway Safety Improvement Program and updating the Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The 

TSOS commissions the development of crash modification factors, safety and performance functions, road 

safety reviews and audits, and other assorted studies and reports to further the Safety program or identify 

potential locations of concern. The TSOS collaborates with multiple sections internal to ALDOT as well as 

external state agencies, universities, and local agencies to identify locations of concern and develop projects to 

address transportation safety concerns consistent with the SHSP. Projects developed and approved through 

the HSIP include a combination of both systemic as well as spot locations which are identified through analysis 

of historical crash data.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 52

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 Alabama Department of Transportation's Traffic & Safety Operations Section (TSOS) is responsible for 

monitoring the availability and use of all federal HSIP funding available to our state. In order to make HSIP 

funding decisions, the TSOS has the responsibility of developing a prioritized list of proposed HSIP projects for 

funding consideration. HSIP project funding decisions can be based on a safety cost-effectiveness using a 

benefit/cost ratio or also by focusing on site specific project locations which may benefit from a particular safety 

countermeasure such as a roundabout or where pedestrian safety is lacking. 

Potential HSIP projects may come from a variety of sources, including the analysis by ALDOT of crash data, 

field observations by ALDOT and/or local governments, law enforcement agencies, emergency response 

organizations, and others. These proposed projects must address a stated goal(s) of the Alabama Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan, including the reduction of crashes, fatalities, injuries or property damage in support of the 

State's established safety performance measures. There must also be a documented description of the safety 

issue(s) along with supporting data and quantitative and/or qualitative information on the proposed safety 

countermeasures. The TSOS will then review and/or approve the HSIP project application if it is confirmed that 

the project is eligible for funding, is consistent with SHSP and its focus areas, is based on sound technical 

engineering analyses, and has non-federal matching funds available for the project. 

Once a project is approved for funding the TSOS will work with the project sponsor on how best to proceed 

with the project including (1) confirming the project schedule and letting date; (2) confirming the project budget; 

(3) confirming the either systemic or non-systemic safety improvement(s) to be implemented; (4) complying 

with plan preparation requirements; and (5) complying with project delivery requirements. The TSOS will also 

serve as a technical advisor to ALDOT Regional Offices and other project sponsors on HSIP program 

requirements, and will approve/disapprove requests for HSIP project schedule revisions in coordination with 

the Region Offices. A project's status will be continually monitored by the TSOS. If there are significant project 

delays it will be determined whether to cancel an HSIP project, require the project sponsor to take corrective 

actions, and/or reprogram the HSIP funding to other eligible project(s). 

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Design and Regional Safety Engineers

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

• Central Office via Statewide Competitive Application Process 

• SHSP Emphasis Area Data 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 52

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

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. Any striping, marking or signing 

improvement must be a safety improvement and not routine maintenance. 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. Star 

Ratings in usRAP are based on the presence or absence of specific safety-related road features and their 

effect on the likelihood of crashes occurring and the severity of crashes that do 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 RSA is a 

formal safety performance examination of existing and proposed roadways by an independent and multidisciplinary 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 four 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. The 9th 

annual Alabama roadway safety Conference is scheduled for October 2022. We have averaged 125 

participants per conference who have learned from various subject matter experts. Participants also learned 

how to use the CARE system, to develop countermeasures for Stop-Controlled Intersections, Work Zone 

Safety for Local Roads, Measures to Improve Roadside Safety etc. The workshops and conferences have all 

been very successful for both internal and external outreach focusing on creating and maintaining a safety 

culture in our state.

The Local Road safety Initiative (LRSI) is available to cities and counties for both rural and urban non-state 

maintained roadways with significant safety risks. All projects submitted must be in accordance with the SHSP 

and applicable Local Road Safety Plans if one has been developed for that County. The LRSI provides funding 

for local agencies when the HRRR rule is not triggered.

Alabama triggered the HRRR Special rule for FY 2019 and FY 2020, and Alabama was informed that the rule 

had been triggered for FY 2021 as well, however, in early spring/ late winter of 2021 we were informed that we 

had in fact not triggered the rule. The ALDOT made the decision to continue forward with the funding since 

projects had been approved and awarded. Beginning in FY 2022, Alabama will provide approximately $4 

Million in funding annually from the HSIP program to local agencies regardless of whether or not the HRRR 

Special Rule is triggered.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 52

The ALDOT is also sponsoring the development of Local Road Safety Plans for all 67 counties. One county is 

complete, ten are currently under development, and ten are expected to be initiated every year until all 67 have 

LRSPs. The pilot and phase I (10 counties) have been completed. right now, Phase II is on hold. 

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

Bureaus, Divisions) are involved with HSIP planning. 

• Design 

• Districts/Regions 

• Local Aid Programs Office/Division 

• Maintenance 

• Operations 

• Planning 

• Traffic Engineering/Safety 

• Other-ALDOT County Transportation 

Describe coordination with internal partners. 

The TSOS collaborates with multiple facets of the department on a regular basis. 

▪ The TSOS partners with the Media and Community Relations Bureau on safety outreach 

efforts, the crash facts book, and other public facing facets of the safety program. 

▪ The TSOS partners with the ALDOT Regions to identify locations of concern, determine 

potential solutions, and develop projects to implement those solutions. 

▪ The TSOS partners with the Local Transportation Bureau and Region Local 

Transportation Engineers to administer the Local Road Safety Initiative and the High 

Risk Rural Roads Program(when triggered) as well as any standard HSIP projects 

awarded to local agencies. 

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

• Academia/University 

• FHWA 

• Governors Highway Safety Office 

• Law Enforcement Agency 

• Local Government Agency 

• Local Technical Assistance Program 

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

• 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 

Describe coordination with external partners. 

ALDOT maintains a close relationship with its safety partners, including (1) Academia/University, (2) FHWA, 

(3) Alabama Governors Highway Safety Office, (4) Alabama Local Technical Assistance Program, (5) Regional 

Planning Organizations (MPOs, RPOs, & COGs), (6) County and Local Governments, (7) Alabama 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 52

Department of Public Health, (8) Alabama Department of Public Safety (aka ALEA), (9) Alabama Department 

of Education, and (10) Alabama Department of Economic and Community Affairs (ADECA). 

The universities and the Alabama LTAP help advance the implementation of the HSIP through valuable 

research, data management, and data collection, and by providing training and support to ALDOT and its 

partners in the areas of roadway safety. The Planning Organizations, and the county/local government 

agencies apply and receive funding for safety projects through the HSIP. Although not directly funding through 

HSIP efforts, ALDOT maintains a close working relationship with Public Health, Public Safety, Education, and 

ADECA to advance safety throughout the state through a 4-E approach. 

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State 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 

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

implementation and evaluation processes? 

Yes 

https://www.dot.state.al.us/programs/HSIP.html contains all HSIP processes as well as others. 

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

• Bicycle Safety 

• Horizontal Curve 

• HRRR

• Intersection 

• Local Safety 

• Median Barrier 

• Pedestrian Safety 

• Roadway Departure 

• Shoulder Improvement 

• Sign Replacement And Improvement 

• Wrong Way Driving 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 52

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes • 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

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

No

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

Local projects are identified but are not addressed in this program.

How are projects under this program 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

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 52

Program: Horizontal Curve

Date of Program Methodology:1/2/2012

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• 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

Available funding:50

Ranking based on net benefit:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: HRRR

Date of Program Methodology:5/1/2020
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 52

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal 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

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

Available funding:50

Ranking based on net benefit:50

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

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

Page 12 of 52

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

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

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-ALDOT Region selection of Candidates

• Other-Safety and Operations 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

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/22/2020

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
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 52

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

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

• selection committee

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

selected, indicate the relative importance of each process in project prioritization. 

Enter either the weights or numerical rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must 

equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving both processes the same rank 

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

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology:9/13/2011

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 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 52

• 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

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

How are projects under this program 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

Other-Projects are ranked by priority:50

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology:1/1/2014

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Traffic • Roadside features
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 52

• 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

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).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C:2

Available funding:1

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2020

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Horizontal curvature

• Roadside features

• Other-Existing Shoulder if 

applicable
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 52

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

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Crash Analysis, Road Safety Assessments, HSM Methodologies

• 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

Total Relative Weight:100

Program: Shoulder Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:1/2/2006

What is the justification for this program? 

• Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area

What is the funding approach for this program? 

Competes with all projects

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

• All crashes

• Fatal and serious injury crashes 

only

• Traffic

• Volume

• Lane miles

• Horizontal curvature

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 52

• Crash frequency

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-Crash Analysis, Road Safety Assessments, HSM Methodologies

• 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).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding:1

Cost Effectiveness:2

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2020

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 • Traffic

• Volume

• Horizontal curvature

• Functional classification

• Roadside features

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 52

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

program?

Yes

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

Yes

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

• Other-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: Wrong Way Driving

Date of Program Methodology:7/1/2020

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 

• Other-Wrong Way Crashes • Functional classification

• Other-Interchange Form

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

• Crash frequency

• Other-HSM Methodologies

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

program?

Yes
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 52

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

Yes

How are projects under this program 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

Ranking based on B/C:1

Available funding:2

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements? 

 64

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvements? 

• Cable Median Barriers 

• Horizontal curve signs 

• Pavement/Shoulder Widening 

• Rumble Strips 

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 

• Stakeholder input 

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

No

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

Yes 

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

The Highway Safety Manual (HSM) is currently used in Design Exception analyses and occasionally in the 

evaluation of alternative analyses for new or reconstructed roadways on an as needed or requested by the 

Traffic Safety and Operations Section. The HSM, and in particular Part A, B & D are used in the evaluation of 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 52

individual projects for HSIP funding, as well as, the overall management of the Safety Programs within the 

department.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 52

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) $34,538,148 $39,784,000 115.19%

HRRR Special Rule (23 

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

$4,707,866 $3,266,000 69.37%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

154)

$0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 

164)

$0 $0 0%

RHCP (for HSIP 

purposes) (23 U.S.C. 

130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $4,466,029 $4,511,000 101.01%

Totals $43,712,043 $47,561,000 108.81%

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

safety projects? 

10%

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

10%

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

4%

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

4%

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%
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 52

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

the reporting period under 23 U.S.C. 126? 

21705422%

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

the future. 

Impediments 

▪ Identification of problem sites 

• Increased outreach and buy-in from all levels of ALDOT and local agencies to 

help in identifying locations. 

▪ Timely Project development 

• Increased number of projects to over program HSIP budget in order to have 

backup project in the event a planned project does not stay on schedule.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 52

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

STATEWIDE LOW COST 

FORCE ACCOUNT 

PROGRAM FOR STATE 

MAINTAINED ROUTES 

AND INTERSECTIONS 

FY 2021-2022

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

Miles $1000000 $1000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

MULTIPLE Multiple Other

DEVELOPE TIMING 

PLANS AND SUPPORT 

RTOP OPERATIONS IN 

THE SOUTHWEST 

REGION (PHASE 1)

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

traffic control - 

other

Intersections $505000 $505000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

SAFETY STUDIES, 

TRAFFIC COUNTS, AND 

OTHER ENGINEERING 

SUPPORT SERVICES AS 

NEEDED TO SUPPORT 

THE STATEWIDE 

SAFETY PROGRAM 

FY22/FY23

Miscellaneous Data collection safety study $510000 $510000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 VARIES Systemic Data Data

ROAD SAFETY REVIEWS 

FOR VARIOUS 

SELECTED LOCATIONS 

STATEWIDE FOR 

FY2022 AND FY 2023

Miscellaneous Data collection safety study $50000 $50000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 VARIES Systemic Data Data

INSTALLATION OF 

TRAFFIC SIGNAL AND 

ACCELERATION LANE 

EXTENSION AT SR-1 

(US-431) AND SR-79

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $121000 $121000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther13,322 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS (RCUT) ON SR-25 (US-411) 

AT APPALACHIAN 

HIGHWAY NEAR 

TURKEY TOWN

Intersection 

geometry

Innovative 

Intersection (e.g. 

MUT, RCUT, QR)

1 Intersections $12573 $101000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther7,048 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACING ON SR68 IN CEDAR BLUFF 

FROM SR-9 TO SR-35 IN 

GAYLESVILLE 

INCLUDING GUARDRAIL 

RESET (SAFETY 

REPLACEMENT FOR 

STEEL BLOCKOUTS)

Roadside Barrier - other 1 Miles $59579 $2159579 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther4,518 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 52

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

RESURFACING AND 

INTERSECTION SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS ON SR75 FROM STRICKLAND 

STREET TO SR-1 (US431)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $67409 $2311189 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 13,034 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACE, ACCESS 

MANAGEMENT, AND 

INTERSECTION SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS ON SR25 (US-411) FROM SR-77 

IN RAINBOW CITY TO 

1000 FEET NORTH OF 

RIVERBEND DRIVE 

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

6 Miles $305325 $6159674 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther30,655 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Multiple Intersection

INSTALLATION 

GUARDRAIL AND 

GUARDRAIL END 

ANCHORS 

MISCELLANEOUS

Roadside Barrier- metal 0 Miles $185052 $185052 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Local Road or 

Street

3,000 35 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

INTERSECTION 

MODIFICATION ON SR251 AT CR-83(LINDSAY 

LANE) ROUNDABOUT

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Intersections $4747744 $4747744 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 7,001 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

TRAFFIC STUDY FOR 

INTERSECTION OF SR99 AND SR-127

Interchange 

design

Interchange 

design - other

1 Intersections $13850 $13850 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 7,800 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS ON CR1462 FROM SR-36

Roadway Roadway - other 0 Miles $299164 $299164 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor Collector 891 35 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS ON SR2 (US-72)

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

0 Miles $75000 $75000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther19,413 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

(GUARDRAIL AND 

TRAFFIC CONTROL 

DEVICES ON CR-12 AT 5 

SITES

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

0 Miles $188560 $188560 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major Collector 968 35 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

PLANING, STRIPING, 

LEVELING, 2FT SAFETY 

WIDENING AND 

GUARDRAILS

Roadway Roadway 

widening - travel 

lanes

4 Miles $139353 $1479957 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther16,210 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 52

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

CONCRETE REHAB AND 

STEEL BLOCKOUT 

REPLACEMENT ON I-59

Roadside Barrier - other 5 Miles $22537 $10126618 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate115,973 60 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

SURFACE TREATMENT, 

STRIPING, GUARDRAIL 

AND END ANCHORS ON 

SR-75

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

7 Miles $107268 $1999608 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther1,308 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

CONCRETE REHAB AND 

GUARDRAIL RESET 

STEEL BLOCKOUTS ON 

I-59

Roadside Barrier - other 9 Miles $146272 $21628207 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate29,422 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

PAVEMENT REHAB AND 

GUARDRAIL SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS ON I-65

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

6 Miles $1917 $6664091 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate75,789 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, LEVELING, 

STEEL BLOCKOUT 

REPLACEMENT ON SR38(US-280)

Roadside Roadside - other 6 Miles $9249 $9906462 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther90,161 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS SR-160 

AT THE I-65 

INTERCHANGE RAMP 

AND SR-3(US31)

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

1 Miles $352253 $352253 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 3,453 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING AND 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR-1 

(US431)

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

8 Miles $515091 $3029948 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther4,890 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, 2FT SAFETY 

WIDENING, BRIDGE 

GUARDRAIL RETROFIT, 

END ANCHORS SR-259

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

3 Miles $31459 $1572955 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 11,217 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACE, STRIPING, 

2FT WIDENING, 

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS SR-259

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

13 Miles $1652326 $5330085 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 1,661 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACE, STRIPING, 

2FT SAFETY WIDENING, 

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS SR-4(US-78)

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

6 Miles $55450 $2772518 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 10,748 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, 2FT SAFETY 

WIDENING GUARDRAIL 

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

9 Miles $658286 $3657145 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,301 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 52

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

RETROFIT, END 

ANCHORS SR-4(US78)

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, GUARDRAIL 

AND END ANCHORS, 

CROSS SLOPE 

CORRECTIONS SR-9 

FROM SR-4

Roadway Roadway - other 11 Miles $293179 $3852054 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 3,253 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, GUARDRAIL 

RETROFIT AND 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR-9 

N OF SR-38 (US280)

Roadway 

delineation

Roadway 

delineation - 

other

9 Miles $685297 $3426483 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 3,916 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

STRIPING, SCORING, 

CROSS SLOPE 

CORRECTIONS, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR-9 

FROM COOSA COUNTY 

TO CR-91

Roadway Roadway - other 4 Miles $705508 $2275833 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,787 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

WIDENING AND 

RESURFACING ON CR34 FROM SR-49 TO SR38(US280)

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

8 Miles $1072591 $1072591 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major Collector 1,685 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

(STRIPING AND PAVED 

SHOULDER VARIOUS 

SITES CHAMBERS 

COUNTY

Roadway Roadway - other 0 Miles $366851 $366851 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ACCESS MANAGEMENT 

ON SR-38 (US 280) 

COOSA RIVER BRIDGE 

TO SR-21

Access 

management

Access 

management - 

other

12 Miles $2000000 $2000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther20,738 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Multiple Other

CABLE GUIDERAIL 

INSTALLATION ON I-59 

GREENE COUNTY LINE 

TO 3RD AVE OVERPASS

Roadside Barrier – cable 17 Miles $1069534 $1069534 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate55,431 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACE AND 1.5FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR175 FROM SR-14 TO SR5

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

5 Miles $327599 $995575 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 390 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACE, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING AND 

SHOULDER SCORING 

ON SR-6(US-82)

Shoulder 

treatments

Shoulder 

treatments - other

6 Miles $1181260 $6617025 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther8,669 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 52

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

GUARDRAIL FOR WCR 

SAFETY ASSESSMENT 

SITES ON VARIOUS 

ROUTES

Miscellaneous Road safety 

audits

0 Miles $849914 $849914 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data Data

RESURFACING, 

CENTERLINE SCORING 

AND 2FT SAFETY 

WIDENING SR69

Roadside Roadside - other 6 Miles $450000 $2450000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 4,941 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

REALIGNING SR-171 

AND ADD TURNING 

LANE AT PREWITT LOOP 

RD

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

realignment

1 Intersections $136356 $136356 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 3,666 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

(STRIPING, MARKERS, 

SIGNS) 3 SITES ON CR-2 

AND CR-9SUMPTER

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Roadway signs 

and traffic control 

- other

$89377 $89377 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Local Road or 

Street

535 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR69 FROM SR-14 TO 

CHINQUAPIN RD AND 

SR-25

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

1 Miles $37662 $773273 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 7,817 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS VARIOUS 

SITES CR-65

Roadside Barrier- metal $66824 $66824 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Local Road or 

Street

0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

INTERSECTION AND 

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

ROUNDABOUT SR-13

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $2187371 $2187371 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 8,557 45 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACE, 

GUARDRAIL STEEL 

BLOCKOUT 

REPLACEMENT I-22

Roadside Roadside - other 6 Miles $13377 $12935426 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialInterstate13,191 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACE, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING AND 

CENTER AND 

SHOULDER SCORING 

SR-241 MARION 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

5 Miles $494852 $2800176 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 1,122 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING 

CENTER AND 

SHOULDER SCORING 

ON SR-14 GREENE 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

6 Miles $662030 $3806659 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 956 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 52

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

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING 

CENTER AND 

SHOULDER SCORING 

ON SR-17 LAMAR 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

6 Miles $818297 $4622765 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 1,749 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2.5FT 

SAFETY WIDENING AND 

SCORING SR-241 

MARION COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

7 Miles $849830 $3819378 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 1,000 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING AND 

SHOULDER SCORING 

ON SR-5 WALKER 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

7 Miles $115501 $4657335 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,933 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL FOR WCR 

SAFETY ASSESSMENT 

VARIOUS ROUTES

Roadside Barrier- metal 7 $302545 $302545 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 

SHOULDER SCORING, 

2FT SAFETY WIDENING 

ON SR-17 LAMAR 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

5 Miles $624237 $3847715 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 1,709 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING AND 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR14 GREENE COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

3 Miles $312581 $3657460 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 2,128 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAILS AND END 

ANCHORS VARIOUS 

SITES GREENE COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $157605 $157605 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT WIRE RD 

AND COX RD

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $175429 $175429 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 12,115 50 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Intersections Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR8(US-80) MACON 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

4 Miles $217952 $1816263 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 7,145 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT CR-8 

AND CR-59 ELMORE 

COUNTY

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $1496174 $1496174 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Major Collector 3,035 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR-3 

AUTAUGA COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

4 Miles $192090 $1280598 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 9,274 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 52

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

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS VARIOUS 

SITES BULLOCK 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $168829 $168829 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Multiple/Varies Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

HFST I-85 SB RAMP TO I65 SBRoadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface

1 Miles $35000 $35000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate77,392 70 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

HFST SR-8(US-80) FROM 

SR-1 (US280) TO 

RAILROAD ST

Roadway Pavement 

surface – high 

friction surface

1 Miles $15000 $15000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther22,093 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT SR-126 

AT I-85 EXIT 16 AND SR126/SR-8 (US-80) 

MARLER RD

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $1141982 $1141982 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

WIDENING AND 

RESURFACING ELMORE 

COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

4 Miles $280643 $882557 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Local Road or 

Street

0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT SR-51 

AND GATEWAY DR LEE 

COUNTY

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $500000 $500000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 8,882 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS(SIGNS, 

STRIPING, RUMBLE 

STRIPS) VARIOUS SITES 

AUTAUGA

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

$23890 $23890 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

(SUPERELEVATION 

CORRECTIONS, 

SHOULDER WIDENING, 

STRIPING, CENTERLINE 

SCORING, MARKERS 

CR-179 LEE COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

$267970 $267970 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Minor Collector 1,141 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ADDING LEFT TURN 

LANE AND MODIFYING 

INTERSECTION OF SR-1 

(US-431) AND GREY 

HODGES RD

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

Intersections $53000 $53000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther17,745 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

MODIFYING VERTICAL 

AND HORIZONTAL 

CURVE CONVERTING 

TO 4-WAY STOP 

COFFEE COUNTY

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

geometry - other

Intersections $63000 $63000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 2,811 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 52

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

ADDING LEFT TURN 

LANE AND MODIFYING 

INTERSECTION SR15(US-29) AND SR-137 

COVINGTON COUNTY

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

Intersections $33890 $33890 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,185 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

ROUNDABOUT AT SR167 AND SR-87 PIKE 

COUNTY

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $242000 $242000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 2,972 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR134 FROM SR-123 TO 

CR-67

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

7 Miles $412091 $1988799 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 6,282 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING SR-1 

(US-431) GUARDRAIL 

RESET STEEL 

BLOCKOUTS HENRY 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal 13 Miles $152898 $6983924 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 11,008 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

WIDENING SR-302 

COFFEE COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

2 Miles $255874 $1112494 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Major Collector 713 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

WIDENING SR-55 

COVINGTON COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

1 Miles $45784 $1144609 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 4,351 35 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ADDING LEFT TURN 

LANE AND MODIFYING 

INTERSECTION SR15(US-29) AND SR-137 

COVINGTON COUNTY

Intersection 

geometry

Add/modify 

auxiliary lanes

1 Intersections $512411 $512411 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 1,185 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

ACCESS MANAGEMENT 

ON SR-53 (US 231) DALE 

COUNTY

Access 

management

Access 

management - 

other

$60000 $60000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther19,654 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS VARIOUS 

SITES COVINGTON 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $68000 $68000 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS VARIOUS 

SITES BARBOUR 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $178648 $178648 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT SR-55 

AND SR-12

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

Intersections $2150 $2150 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 5,538 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 52

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

INTERSECTION 

IMPROVEMENTS AND 

ACCESS MANAGEMENT 

SR-12 HOUSTON 

COUNTY

Access 

management

Access 

management - 

other

$2133762 $2133762 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialInterstate19,588 65 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS CR-1 

GENEVA COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $34154 $34154 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Minor Collector 71 35 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

GUARDRAIL AND END 

ANCHORS CR-4442 PIKE 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $1480 $1480 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Rural Major Collector 310 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR10 WILCOX COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

14 Miles $360460 $4005112 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 0 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

WIDENING SR-69 

CLARKE COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

6 Miles $394898 $1644898 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 343 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR69 CLARKE COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

$318999 $1450000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 381 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, 2FT 

SAFETY WIDENING SR41 MONROE COUNTY

Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder – 

paved or other 

(includes add 

shoulder)

9 Miles $510001 $3000000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Minor Arterial 327 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ADDING CENTER LEFT 

TURN LANE SR-13(US43) CLARKE COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

$100000 $100000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Principal ArterialOther15,000 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING, STEEL 

BLOCKOUT SR-16(US90) MOBILE COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal 3 Miles $3613 $1813434 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther16,439 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

TRAFFIC SIGNAL 

UPGRADES/ITS SR42(US-98) MOBILE 

COUNTY

Intersection 

traffic control

Intersection 

traffic control - 

other

$200000 $1271420 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther19,861 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

RESURFACING AND 

STEEL BLOCKOUT SR16(US-90) MOBILE 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal $2389 $560534 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther17,726 40 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 52

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

LOW COST SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS FOLEY 

BEACH EXPRESS

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

$10000 $10000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 23,017 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

AREA WIDE 

HORIZONTAL CURVE 

PHASE II SWR

Roadway Roadway - other $34000 $34000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Rural Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

CORRIDOR STUDY SR16(US-90) MOBILE 

COUNTY

Miscellaneous Miscellaneous - 

other

$57929 $57929 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther26,025 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Data Data

RESURFACING AND 

STEEL BLOCKOUT 

REPLACEMENT SR16(US 90) BALDWIN 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal 5 Miles $5051 $3117173 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther23,392 50 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING AND 

STEEL BLOCKOUT SR3(US 31) BALDWIN 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal 7 Miles $7702 $3278202 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther11,831 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

RESURFACING AND 

STEEL BLOCKOUT SR-3 

(US 31) BALDWIN 

COUNTY

Roadside Barrier- metal 4 Miles $224791 $2717971 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther11,831 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ADDING TURN LANES 

AND OTHER SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS SR17/SR-57(US 45) MOBILE 

COUNTY

Roadway Roadway - other 55 Miles $200000 $200000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Principal ArterialOther9,916 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

AREA WIDE 

HORIZONTAL CURVE 

PHASE II PROJECT 

INTERSTATE RAMPS 

SWR

Roadway signs 

and traffic 

control

Curve-related 

warning signs 

and flashers

$896601 $896601 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Multiple/Varies Principal ArterialInterstate0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

ROUNDABOUT SR-13 

AND CR-44 BALDWIN 

COUNTY

Intersection 

traffic control

Modify control – 

Modern 

Roundabout

$93022 $93022 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 3,760 45 County 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

INTERSECTION 

REALIGNMENT AND 

ADD TURN LANES CR-13 

AND SR-31

Intersection 

geometry

Intersection 

realignment

$71860 $71860 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 16,537 55 State 

Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections Intersection

WIDENING FOR CENTER 

TURN LANE SR-3(US 31) 

BALDWIN COUNTY

Roadway Roadway 

widening - add 

lane(s) along 

segment

$300000 $300000 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Minor Arterial 16,537 45 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 52

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

INSTALLATION OF 

MARKERS AND RUMBLE 

STRIPS CR-9 BALDWIN 

COUNTY

Roadway Rumble strips – 

edge or shoulder

$150311 $150311 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Major Collector 1,985 50 County 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure

SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENTS 

CELESTE RD

Roadway Roadway - other $447984 $447984 HRRR 

Special Rule 

(23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Major Collector 4,991 45 City or 

Municipal 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Multiple Other

CENTERLINE SCORING 

ON SR-17/SR-57(US 45) 

MOBILE COUNTY

Roadway Pavement 

surface - other

50 Miles $489446 $489446 HSIP (23 

U.S.C. 148)

Urban Multiple/Varies 0 State 

Highway 

Agency

Systemic Roadway 

Departure

Roadway 

departure
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 52

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 852 820 849 1,088 948 954 930 932 984

Serious Injuries 8,564 7,960 8,540 8,152 7,480 6,990 6,687 4,777 5,184

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

1.310 1.250 1.240 1.600 1.380 1.350 1.314 1.400 1.364

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

13.170 12.140 13.020 12.000 10.640 11.080 9.479 7.200 10.179

Number nonmotorized fatalities64 103 105 127 121 115 120 108 108

Number of nonmotorized serious 

injuries

322 264 274 258 249 231 242 249 273
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 52

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

9000

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Annual Serious Injuries

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

Page 36 of 52

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

14

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

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

Page 37 of 52

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

84 366

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

0 0.4

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - Other

123 492

Rural Minor Arterial 125 688

Rural Minor Collector 21 130

Rural Major Collector 148 816

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

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

Page 38 of 52

Functional 

Classification

Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

 (per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Local Road or 

Street

66 452

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Interstate

45 225

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other 

Freeways and 

Expressways

4 27

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - Other

125 884

Urban Minor Arterial 80 596

Urban Minor Collector 4 13

Urban Major Collector 41 304

Urban Local Road or 

Street

37 348
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 52

Year 2020

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

435 1,976

County Highway 

Agency

230 1,281

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

City or Municipal 

Highway Agency

146 787

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

Other State Agency

Other Local Agency

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

Railroad

State Toll Authority

Local Toll Authority

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, 

University)

Indian Tribe Nation

Safety Performance Targets 

Safety Performance Targets 

Calendar Year 2023 Targets *

Number of Fatalities:1000.0

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

Page 40 of 52

This performance target was developed through analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in 

conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted 

to account for uncertainty due to the trends that began in 2020. This target supports the SHSP by helping 

Alabama focus its safety strategy, investment and making decisions on allocating its resources to reduce longterm fatality trends.

Number of Serious Injuries:6500.0

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

This performance target was developed through analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in 

conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted 

to account for uncertainty due to the trends that began in 2020. This target supports the SHSP by helping 

Alabama focus its safety strategy, investment and making decisions on allocating its resources to reduce longterm serious injury trends.

Fatality Rate:1.420

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

This performance target was developed through analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in 

conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted 

to account for uncertainty due to the trends that began in 2020.This performance target was developed through 

analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year 

rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted to account for uncertainty due to the trends 

that began in 2020. This target supports the SHSP by helping Alabama focus its safety strategy, investment 

and making decisions on allocating its resources to reduce long-term fatality rate trends.

Serious Injury Rate:9.820

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

This performance target was developed through analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in 

conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted 

to account for uncertainty due to the trends that began in 2020.This target supports the SHSP by helping 

Alabama focus its safety strategy, investment and making decisions on allocating its resources to reduce longterm serious injury rate trends.

Total Number of Non-Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries:400.0

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

This performance target was developed through analyzing trend analysis of both individual years crashes in 

conjunction with trend analysis of the five-year rolling averages. Trend analysis projections were then adjusted 

to account for uncertainty due to the trends that began in 2020. This target supports the SHSP by helping 

Alabama focus its safety strategy, investment and making decisions on allocating its resources to reduce longterm non motorized fatality and serious injury trends.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 52

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

safety performance targets. 

Statewide safety performance targets are set through a collaborative effort between ALDOT and ADECA 

utilizing historic data combined with trend forecasting. The targets are reported and then submitted to the 

MPO's for their concurrence and adoption, or if they choose they may adopt their own 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 961.0 949.6

Number of Serious Injuries 6595.0 6223.6

Fatality Rate 1.360 1.362

Serious Injury Rate 9.355 9.716

Non-Motorized Fatalities and 

Serious Injuries

366.0 363.2

Alabama failed to meet Fatality Rate and Serious Injury rate targets for 2020. Alabama has an anomaly for FY 

2016 that is still having an effect on meeting our targets. An Implementation Plan is being developed for 2023.

Applicability of Special Rules

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

Yes

For FY 2021 ALDOT was notified they triggered the HRRR rule, but was later notified it was a mistake and 

HRRR was not triggered for 2021 for ALDOT. All projects approved by ALDOT for HRRR for FY 2021 were 

converted to regular HSIP funding.

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

145 179 182 134 159 115 114
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 52

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021

Number of Older Driver 

and Pedestrian Serious 

Injuries

1,437 1,385 1,344 584 604 360 409
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 52

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness 

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP? 

• Benefit/Cost Ratio 

• Change in fatalities and serious injuries 

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

the State's program level evaluations.

Following a spike in fatalities during 2016, Alabama has shown a downward trend in the last two reporting 

cycles. Alabama Traffic Safety & Operations Section has continued to refocus its efforts based on previous 

years crash type trends to implement countermeasures to reduce the long-term trend for fatalities. Serious 

Injury crashes are trending downward, and we anticipate that this trend will continue to start to flatten over the 

coming years. 

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

success of the Highway Safety Improvement Program? 

• # miles improved by HSIP 

• # RSAs completed 

• Increased focus on local road safety 

• More systemic programs 

• Organizational change 

• Policy change 

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)

Roadway Departure 519 2,696 489 2,818.2

Intersections 291 2,687 303.7 2,839

Pedestrians 113 208

Bicyclists 7 41

Older Drivers 108 469 113.4 488

Motorcyclists 80 447
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 52

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)

Work Zones 24 106

Data 950 6,224
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 52

0

200

400

600

800

1000

1200

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

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

0

1000

2000

3000

4000

5000

6000

7000

8000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

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

Page 46 of 52

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

3000

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

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

Page 47 of 52

Project Effectiveness

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

Page 48 of 52

Compliance Assessment

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

 07/18/2017

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP? 

From: 2017 To: 2022

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

 2022

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]

50 50 25 25 25 25

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]

10 100

Begin Point 

Segment Descriptor 

(10) [10]

100 100 100 100

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11) [11]

100 100 100 100

Segment Length 

(13) [13]

100 100

Direction of 

Inventory (18) [18]

100 100

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

100 100 100 100
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 52

ROAD TYPE *MIRE NAME (MIRE 

NO.)

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

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

Median Type (54) 

[55]

100 50

Access Control (22) 

[23]

100 100

One/Two Way 

Operations (91) [93]

100 100

Number of Through 

Lanes (31) [32]

100 100 100

Average Annual 

Daily Traffic (79) [81]

100 100

AADT Year (80) [82] 100 100

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

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]

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131) 

[131]

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road 

(79) [81]

AADT Year (80) [82]

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139) [129]

INTERCHANGE/RAMP Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178) [168]

Location Identifier 

for Roadway at 
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 52

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]

Ramp Length (187) 

[177]

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]

Year of Ramp AADT 

(192) [182]

Functional Class 

(19) [19]

Type of 

Governmental 

Ownership (4) [4]

Totals (Average Percent Complete): 92.22 94.44 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 69.44 13.89 85.00 5.00

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

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. 

ALDOT representatives from the Traffic Safety and Operations Section and the Traffic Engineering Section along with FHWA Alabama Division Office representatives meet regularly to discuss strategies and issues regarding ALDOT's 

transition to MIRE compliance. In addition, the MIRE committee members are actively engaged with the Alabama Traffic Records Coordinating Committee. The TRCC goal is to move the state ahead effectively in applying information 

technology to its transportation systems. The most significant product to the TRCC is the DRAFT Traffic Safety Information System (TSIS) Five Year Plan. In this document, one of the goals or measurable performance metric, is for 20% 

of the data elements functional per year to be collected in regards to MIRE Fundamental Data collection. 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 (HPMS). 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. TSOS is currently researching additional funding opportunities to support the MIRE collection efforts, and looking 

into partnerships with state universities for help in the processing of data that is collected.
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 52

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

HSIP-PAG.pdf

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation:

Compliance Assessment:
2022 Alabama Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 52

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.