Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 1

Message from FHWA Acting Associate

Administrator for Safety Beth Alicandri

From Many, One

It is such a fundamental aspect of our American culture that 

we take it for granted: we are all different, but we become 

one by working across our differences and pulling together 

to focus on reaching a single, unified goal. For us 

transportation safety professionals, that goal is zero deaths. 

We cannot pay for our mobility with lives. 

Improving safety and reaching zero requires us to work across disciplines, 

across levels of government, and across public and private sectors. We must 

innovate in terms of solutions and partners.

The transportation industry faces constricted resources, reduced staffing, and 

a sometimes challenging political climate, making the need to combine our 

talents and share our successful approaches even more critical. As we 

continue to work with long-term partners, we will also seek out new 

collaborations as we advance step by step toward our shared goal. 

Using a collaborative approach, we can leverage knowledge and skills from 

across the FHWA and USDOT; from other Federal agencies; from our 

colleagues at the State, county, and local levels; and from planning bodies, 

tribes, enforcement agencies, and stakeholder groups. 

This issue of Safety Compass contains a variety of articles that highlight 

partnership and collaboration, ranging from recent peer exchanges where 

attendees shared important lessons from rumble strip installation projects 

(page 4), to involving tribes in the SHSP update process (page 7), to 

opportunities to work with peers on a pooled fund study (page 16), to name 

just a few. We hope you find this issue informative, and that you take 

advantage of the contact information we provide with each article to learn 

more about how your peers can help you to improve safety on every roadway 

in our Nation.

A Publication of the Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2

In This Issue:

Introducing the HSIP Final Rule...........2

Safety PM Regs Now in Effect...............4

Rumble Strip Virtual Peer Exchanges 

Glean Interesting Findings....................4

Low-Cost Treatments for Horizontal 

Curve Safety Resource Released ...........6

Involving Tribes in SHSP Updates: 

Approaches and Benefits .......................7

FHWA Reliability of Safety Mgmt.

Methods Series: Safety Effectiveness 

Evaluation...............................................9

DDSA Launches Outreach Blitz.............9

Road Diets Peer Exchanges .................10

Road Diet Roundup: Events and 

Activities................................................ 11

Data Req's in New HSIP Final Rule.... 12

A Review of Tribal Transportation 

Safety Provisions in the FAST Act....... 13

Frank Julian: A Lifetime of 

Achievements in Safety ........................ 15

FHWA Seeks Partners for SHRP2 

Pooled Fund Study ............................... 16

Roadway Lighting DB Out In July!.... 17

Safety-related Performance-based 

Planning SOP Review ..........................18

Integrating Speed Management in 

the Three Safety Focus Areas .............. 19

Nat'l Work Zone Awareness Week..... 20

The HSIS GIS Processing Pilot Study .21

Nat'l Ctr for Rural Road Safety 

Broadens Access to Safety Resources 24

AR Graduates ROADS Scholars ..........25

New OH Roadway Safety Info App ... 26

Missouri Manages Rural Queues ........27

Announcements and Events ............... 28

Get Safety Compass delivered 

straight to your inbox! 

Subscribe Today!
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 2

INTRODUCING THE HIGHWAY SAFETY 

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM FINAL RULE

By: Bob Pollack, Karen Scurry, and Jennifer Warren, 

FHWA Office of Safety

The FHWA published the Highway Safety 

Improvement Program (HSIP) Final Rule in the 

Federal Register on March 15, 2016, with an 

effective date of April 14, 2016. The HSIP Final Rule 

updates the HSIP regulation under 23 CFR 924 to be 

consistent with MAP-21 and the FAST Act and to 

clarify existing program requirements. 

What is the HSIP? 

The HSIP is a core Federal-aid program the purpose 

of which is to achieve a significant reduction in 

fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. 

The States receive over $2.4 billion in HSIP funding 

each year to implement highway safety improvement 

projects using a data-driven, strategic approach that 

focuses on performance. The HSIP Final Rule prescribes the requirements for the development, implementation, and evaluation of an HSIP in each State.

What are the major provisions of the 

HSIP Final Rule? 

The HSIP Final Rule contains three major policy 

provisions related to the HSIP report content and 

schedule, the Strategic Highway Safety Plan update 

cycle, and the subset of the model inventory of 

roadway elements, also known as the MIRE 

fundamental data elements. The HSIP report 

schedule remains the same: the HSIP and RailwayHighway Crossing Program (RHCP) report are due 

on August 31st each year. However, all States are 

now required to use FHWA’s online reporting tool to 

submit their annual reports. In addition, the HSIP 

Final Rule requires States to describe their progress 

in achieving safety outcomes and performance 

targets in the HSIP report. This provision requires 

States not only to document their safety performance 

targets in their annual HSIP report, but also to

include a discussion of the basis for each

established target and how the established target 

supports the long-term SHSP goals. FHWA will 

update the HSIP reporting guidance and online 

reporting tool to align with these new reporting 

requirements for the 2017 reporting cycle. 

The HSIP Final Rule requires States to update their 

SHSP at least once every 5 years, consistent with

the current state of the practice. For those States 

that do not already have a MAP-21 compliant SHSP 

with a process approved by the FHWA Division 

Office, the first SHSP update is due no later than 

August 1, 2017. Other new features include a 

requirement for each State to document its 

implementation process, including actions that 

address more specifically how the SHSP emphasis 

area strategies will be implemented, and to evaluate 

the SHSP as part of the State’s SHSP update 

process. More information about SHSP requirements 

can be found in the revised SHSP Guidance dated 

March 14, 2016 available 

at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/legislationandpolicy/fast/

shsp_guidance.cfm. 

The most significant new requirement of the HSIP 

final rule is for States to collect and use the MIRE 

fundamental data elements on all public roads to 

support enhanced safety analysis and safety 

investment decision making. The HSIP final rule 

establishes three categories of MIRE fundamental 

data elements based on roadway functional 

classification and surface type. States must include a 

strategy that incorporates specific, quantifiable, and 

measurable anticipated improvements for the 

collection of the MIRE fundamental data elements 

into the State Traffic Records Strategic Plan by July 

1, 2017. The collection of the MIRE fundamental 

data elements on all public roads must be complete 

by September 30, 2026. The revised Guidance on 

State Safety Data Systems, dated March 15, 2016, 

includes additional information on the MIRE 

fundamental data elements (see related story on 

page 12) and can be found 

at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/legislationandpolicy/fast/

ssds_guidance.cfm. 

Roadway Category Number of MIRE Fundamental Data Elements

Non-local paved roads 37

Local paved roads 9

Unpaved roads 5
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 3

What should I do now? 

Become familiar with the new HSIP requirements. 

Review the HSIP Final Rule in the Federal Register 

at http://www.regulations.gov (docket number FHWA

-2013-0019). The Federal Register notice summarizes the docket comments, FHWA’s response to 

those comments, and the changes between the 

notice of proposed rulemaking and the final rule. The 

Federal Register notice also includes the revised 

regulation text.

Shortly after publishing the Final Rule, FHWA sponsored a webinar to discuss its requirements. A recording of the webinar and slides are available 

at: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/rulemaking, as are 

a fact sheet and links to other resources to support 

implementation of the HSIP Final Rule.

States should also begin taking immediate steps to 

meet the specific deadlines and requirements related 

to submitting the annual HSIP and RHCP reports, 

updating the Strategic Highway Safety Plan, and 

collecting and using the MIRE fundamental data 

elements, as summarized in the table below: What 

additional resources are available to support 

implementation of the HSIP Final Rule? 

FHWA updated the HSIP MAP-21 guidance 

documents to reflect the new requirements in the 

HSIP Final Rule and the FAST Act. The updated 

guidance documents are available at

http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/legislationandpolicy/fast/.

FHWA will also issue supplemental guidance to 

support implementation of the HSIP and Safety 

Performance Measures Final Rules. The HSIP 

implementation guidance relates existing guidance 

and information resources to the various elements of 

the HSIP and Safety Performance Measures final 

rules and establishes new guidance where needed.

In addition, FHWA offers free assistance on policy, 

program, and technical issues to State and local 

roadway agencies through the Office of Safety’s

technical assistance program. For additional 

information, contact your local Division office or 

visit https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/technical.aspx. 

All information related to the HSIP Final Rule and the 

Safety Performance Measures Final Rule can be 

found at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/rulemaking. 

Important Dates to Remember

Date Actions for State DOTs

August 31, 2016 Use the HSIP online reporting tool to submit the State annual HSIP and RHCP 

reports. 

July 1, 2017

Incorporate specific, quantifiable, and measurable anticipated improvements for the 

collection of MIRE fundamental data elements into the State Traffic Records 

Strategic Plan 

August 1, 2017 Revise the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan Update to be consistent with MAP21 requirements

August 31, 2017 Include safety performance targets and related documentation in annual HSIP 

reports

September 30, 2026 Collect and use the MIRE fundamental data elements to improve safety on all public 

roads

Take action! 

All States should review and update their 

existing HSIP processes to ensure consistency 

and compliance with the HSIP final rule. 

Supplemental Resources Now Available

• Guidance on State Safety Data Systems

• Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) 

Guidance

• Highway Safety Improvement Program 

Eligibility Guidance
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 4

FHWA’S NEW SAFETY PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES REGULATIONS ARE NOW IN 

EFFECT

By Dana Gigliotti, FHWA Office of Safety

With motor vehicle related fatalities on the rise for 

the first time in several years, the Safety 

Performance Management Measures (Safety PM) 

Final Rule comes at an important time. The 

performance measures provide States and 

metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) with a 

framework for becoming more effective and will 

change how FHWA’s $2.3 billion HSIP is managed. 

As Federal, State, and local partners work together 

to implement this rule, we will achieve improved 

coordination, make better data-driven decisions, and, 

most importantly, save more lives. 

The Safety PM Final Rule has four major provisions

that: 

1. Establish five performance measures that States 

and MPOs must set targets for the 5-year rolling 

averages for: (a) number of fatalities, (b) rate of 

fatalities per 100 million vehicle-miles traveled 

(VMT), (c) number of serious injuries, (d) rate of 

serious injuries per 100 million VMT, and (d) 

number of non-motorized fatalities and nonmotorized serious injuries. 

2. Institute a process for State DOTs and MPOs to 

use to establish and report their safety targets. 

States set targets annually and have the option 

to set urbanized area targets and one target for 

non-urbanized areas. Three of the targets must 

be identical to the National Highway Traffic 

Safety Administration’s (NHTSA) targets, which 

are the number and rate of fatalities and the 

number of serious injuries. MPOs are required to 

set targets within 180 days after the State sets its 

targets. MPOs can either support the State target 

or establish a numerical target specific to the 

MPO planning area. MPOs can select either 

option for each safety performance measure. 

3. Institute a process for FHWA to assess whether 

a State has met or made significant progress 

toward meeting its safety targets. FHWA will 

determine whether a State has met or made 

significant progress toward meeting its targets 

when at least four of the five targets are either 

met or the actual outcome for the target is better 

than baseline performance. Only the five 

performance measures are included in the 

significant progress determination. Optional 

urbanized and non-urbanized targets for States 

and targets for MPOs are not included in the 

significant progress determination. If a State is 

not successful in meeting or making significant 

progress during an annual assessment, the State 

is required to use certain safety funds only for 

HSIP projects and submit an HSIP 

Implementation Plan to FHWA. 

4. Lastly, the Safety PM Final Rule establishes for 

the first time a national definition for serious 

injuries. Currently, States are using different 

definitions and coding conventions to report 

serious injuries in their motor vehicle crash 

databases. However, by April 14, 2019, all States 

must use the definition for “Suspected Serious 

Injury (A)” from the Model Minimum Uniform 

Crash Criteria (MMUCC), 4th Edition. NHTSA has 

developed conversion tables to report the 

number of serious injuries consistent with the 

new definition until States comply with the 

MMUCC definition. 

The new requirements require stakeholders to 

collaborate more closely than ever before. State 

DOTs, MPOs, State highway safety offices, and a 

host of other safety stakeholders should begin 

conversations now on the new requirements, which 

became effective on April 14, 2016. States and 

MPOs are required to begin setting safety targets for 

calendar year 2018. 

FHWA is committed to assisting partners through the

transition to a performance-based highway program. 

FHWA’s Office of Safety has assembled an inventory 

of resources including recorded webinars, 

presentations, fact sheets, and guidance documents. 

FHWA can also provide technical assistance as 

stakeholders navigate through the Safety PM Final 

Rule. Products relating to the rule can be found on 

the FHWA website at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

hsip/rulemaking/. For additional information, contact 

Dana Gigliotti at dana.gigliotti@dot.gov

RUMBLE STRIP VIRTUAL PEER 

EXCHANGES GLEAN INTERESTING 

FINDINGS

By: Cathy Satterfield, FHWA Office of Safety

The FHWA Office of Safety hosted six virtual peer 

exchanges on the topic of rumble strips between 

October of 2015 and February of 2016. Each peer 

exchange included groups of 7-10 States (and 

Federal Lands Highway offices) and was intended to 

bring peers together through videoconference 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 5

technology, enabling them to discuss implementation 

strategies for this life-saving countermeasure. 

Participants included not only our traditional safety 

and design partners, but also:

• Pavement and maintenance engineers to 

discuss the best practices for maintaining the 

integrity of our pavements and how to maintain 

the safety effectiveness of the rumble strips when 

they are overlaid.

• Noise specialists, along with those who respond 

to citizen complaints about noise, to discuss 

techniques and practices that address the noise 

concerns of residents who live near rumble strip 

treatments. 

• Bicycle/pedestrian coordinators and other 

planners to provide insight into the specific 

needs of the wide array of non-motorized road 

users traveling on the Nation’s roadways. 

Not surprisingly, there is considerable variation in 

policies and standards from State to State, just as 

there is much variation in the geometry of roadways, 

topography, and the built environment across our 

Nation. Traffic mix also varies by location; for 

example, Colorado DOT has placed a bicycle traffic 

counter on the shoulder of one corridor on which 

bicycles are approximately 10% of the traffic volume. 

The agency is considering installing counters in 

additional locations notable for higher rates of bicycle 

traffic as well. Other user considerations discussed 

include trucks, over-sized farm equipment, and 

Amish buggies. 

A number of other interesting and important pieces 

of information and lessons have already been shared 

on a wide range of topics. For example, an attendee 

at the first peer exchange, Michigan Pavement 

Construction Engineer Curtis Bleech told colleagues 

he was initially very concerned when MDOT 

leadership decided to place rumble strips extensively 

on their system, but took advantage of the effort to 

strengthen the agency’s longitudinal joint specification. After 5,400 miles of center line rumble strips 

were placed on two-lane, high-speed highways over 

3 years, a cursory review of the pavements determined that joint problems were only exacerbated 

when there was an existing problem at the joint. 

Further analysis of pavement sections with and 

without rumble strips suggest that rumble strips did 

not create adverse impacts on pavement performance in the short-term (see Michigan DOT, Impact 

of Non-Freeway Rumble Strips Phase 1, RC-1575 

(Lansing, MI: 2012), p.47. Available 

at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/MDOT

_Research_Report_RC1575_Report_394019_7.pdf.)

In addition, MDOT has determined fatal and injury 

target crashes were reduced by 47 percent (see 

Michigan DOT, Evaluation of Non-Freeway Rumble 

Strips Phase 2, RC-1627 (Lansing, MI: 2015). 

Available at: http://www.michigan.gov/documents/mdot/

RC1627_489159_7.pdf). Now, Curtis is a proponent of 

rumble strips. 

Another issue that has come to light is that some 

agencies are fog sealing over the rumble strips, 

which requires an extra operation at extra cost and 

results in the need to wait longer to reapply pavement markings. No studies have been completed to 

clearly indicate whether this extends the life of the 

pavement, however, a few States have conducted 

informal reviews and discontinued the practice. 

During the peer exchanges, attendees expressed a 

great deal of interest in the current research into 

sinusoidal rumble strips, which is underway in 

several States. Caltrans and MnDOT have done the 

most extensive work, and both think it shows great 

promise in reducing noise external to the vehicle 

while continuing to provide warning to the driver. 

Another topic of interest was determining how 

rumble strips of smaller dimensions or different 

designs (e.g., raised versions) may affect crash 

modification factors. Several States are using design 

flexibilities to install modified designs to fit specific 

location conditions, with the general belief that they 

will provide crash reductions similar to those found 

This photo depicts both center line as well as shoulder rumble stripes. Bicycle gaps permit bicyclists 

using the shoulder to cross the rumble strip area 

without striking the milled pattern. Source: FHWA
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 6

with the larger, milled designs that have been 

studied. Participants also showed great interest in 

research to determine if there is a difference in 

safety benefits among the different designs. 

Several State DOTs are now expanding the use of 

rumble strips to local roads to help reduce fatal and 

injury crashes. Mark Borst, Traffic Engineer from 

Kansas’ Sedgwick County Public Works, showed 

some examples of both center and edge line rumble 

strip installations made under a Highway Safety 

Improvement Program (HSIP) project. New Jersey 

has also expanded its center line rumble strip 

implementation to cover much of the local system. 

Several States promote the use of rumble strips on 

appropriate county roads based on crash data or on 

corridors with characteristics that tend to be 

overrepresented in run-off-road or cross-center-line 

crashes. The peer exchanges further revealed that 

additional flexibility in the design of rumble strips is 

often necessary to fit the specific location on local 

roads. 

As part of the peer exchange, FHWA provided 

participants a file that compiled the policy/guidance 

and drawings of each of the participating states. 

Although it is only a snapshot, in time we hope to 

find a way to make these available to all interested 

practitioners. FHWA will be developing a final report 

regarding the peer exchanges that will be posted on 

our Roadway Safety Capacity Building website at

https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/technical.aspx#repo

rts when it is available. For more information on 

technical assistance or peer-to-peer events related 

to rumble strips, contact Cathy Satterfield 

at Cathy.Satterfield@dot.gov . 

FHWA RELEASES 2016 EDITION OF THE 

LOW-COST TREATMENTS FOR 

HORIZONTAL CURVE SAFETY RESOURCE

By: Joseph Cheung and Cathy Satterfield, FHWA Office of 

Safety

In 2013, there were 5.7 million crashes reported in 

the United States, including 32,719 fatalities and 

more than 2.3 million injuries (NHTSA, 2014). More 

than half of the 2013 fatalities occurred as a result of 

roadway departure crashes. Vehicles are more likely 

to leave the travel lane of a roadway where the 

roadway alignment changes direction. These 

locations are known as horizontal curves. Several 

studies1 have shown that the average crash rate for 

horizontal curves on 

two-lane rural 

highways is three 

times higher than 

that for a tangent 

section. In addition, 

the severity of 

roadway departure 

crashes on 

horizontal curves is 

also higher than that 

for roadway 

departure crashes on

tangent segments. 

NCHRP Report 500, Volume 

7, identified several strategies to address the specific 

safety problem at horizontal curves. These strategies 

meet one of the following two objectives:

• Reduce the likelihood of a vehicle leaving its lane 

and either crossing the roadway centerline or 

leaving the roadway at a horizontal curve.

• Minimize the damaging consequences of a 

vehicle leaving the roadway at a horizontal curve.

Although the NCHRP report provides information 

about each strategy, transportation professionals 

indicated that a document providing practical 

information on where, when, and how to apply a 

safety countermeasure or design feature—including 

examples and costs—would be valuable to local 

road agencies. In response, FHWA developed the 

Low-Cost Treatments for Horizontal Curve Safety 

(McGee and Hanscom, 2006). However, there have

been many advances in highway safety since the

2006 guide came out, so this year FHWA issued the 

updated Low-Cost Treatments for Horizontal Curve 

Safety 2016. As with the earlier edition, the primary 

audience for the 2016 update is local transportation 

agencies. This publication primarily includes those

engineering countermeasures that are relatively lowcost, such as signage and pavement markings. More 

moderate or higher cost treatments, including 

varying degrees of infrastructure changes, are also 

provided and address superelevation, cross section, 

and shoulder adjustments, among others. This newly 

updated resource will help transportation agencies 

and their construction crews understand the 

available countermeasures and how to select and 

apply them. 

Where possible, this publication provides the 

following for each countermeasure:
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 7

• Description

• Design

• Applications

• Effectiveness

• Relative Cost 

The topics addressed in the updated publication 

include a brief description of site analysis and the 

systemic approach to site selection, markings, signs, 

pavement countermeasures, roadside 

improvements, and addressing intersections at 

curves. The updated report also includes an 

appendix with case studies illustrating various safety 

countermeasures deployed by State DOTs as well 

as a discussion of the safety policies adopted by 

State DOTs. 

Low-Cost Treatments for Horizontal Curve Safety 

2016 is now available for viewing or download 

at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/horicurve

s/fhwasa15084/. For more information on FHWA's 

Roadway Departure Safety Program and horizontal 

curve safety resources, 

visit http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/roadway_dept/ or 

contact Cathy Satterfield 

at Cathy.satterfield@dot.gov.

____________

1 See K.M. Bauer and D.W. Harwood, Safety Effects of 

Horizontal Curve and Grade Combinations on Rural TwoLane Highways, FHWA-HRT-13-077 (Washington DC: 

FHWA, 2014); J.E. Hummer et al., “Curve Crashes: Road 

and Collision Characteristics and Countermeasures,” 

Journal of Transportation Safety and Security 2(2010): 

203-220; also, J.C. Glennon, T.R. Neuman, and J E. 

Leisch, Safety and Operational Considerations for Design 

of Rural Highway Curves, FHWA-RD-86-035 

(Washington, DC: FHWA 1985).

INVOLVING TRIBES IN SHSP UPDATES:

APPROACHES AND BENEFITS 

By: Melonie Barrington and Jennifer Warren, FHWA Office 

of Safety

American Indians and Alaska Natives experience 

higher rates of transportation-related fatalities than 

the general U.S. population, and motor vehicle 

crashes are a leading cause of unintentional injury 

for American Indians and Alaska Natives aged 1 to 

44.

1

Many States and tribes are working together to 

reduce roadway injuries and fatalities in tribal 

communities. These efforts include collaborating 

during the State Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP) process to bring together a diverse group of 

stakeholders, identify road safety challenges, and 

find solutions. 

FHWA’s Noteworthy Practices Database (located 

at: https://rspcb.safety.fhwa.dot.gov/noteworthy/Defa

ult.aspx) recently added practices for four States that 

have collaborated with tribal governments before, 

during, and after the SHSP process. Approaches 

and benefits from Washington, Montana, South 

Dakota, and North Dakota are highlighted below.

Government-to-Government 

Collaboration 

Washington's Centennial Accord

(http://goia.wa.gov/Relations/

Relations.html) is the foundation of the collaborative 

environment for transportation and traffic safety 

efforts between tribes and the State of Washington. 

Signed in 1989, the Accord established governmentto-government relations between the State and 

tribes, in an effort to resolve disagreements before 

they reached the courtroom. That framework of 

collaboration was applied to enhance tribal 

involvement in traffic safety planning.

The Centennial Accord gives State agencies a 

protocol for officially interacting with tribes, including 

having a tribal liaison. Washington transportation 

officials connect with tribal committees, boards, law 

enforcement groups, and planning organizations 

during SHSP updates to engage representatives

from the 29 federally recognized tribes in 

Washington. Traffic safety boards and organizations 

provide a framework for communicating with tribal 

staff involved with the “4Es” of highway safety: 

education, enforcement, engineering, and 

emergency medical services (EMS).

Safety Summits

State and tribal planners in Montana share 

information and strengthen personal relationships 

during safety summits. In the lead-up to the Montana 

Comprehensive Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) 

update in 2014, State and tribal representatives 

collaborated on and conducted four safety summits. 

These summits were hosted by tribes in Montana, 

with rotating sponsorship each year to encourage 

tribal ownership over road safety best practices.

Tribes also host summits and meetings in South 

Dakota. Meetings often include FHWA division staff, 

representatives from the Bureau of Indian Affairs, the 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 8

South Dakota Departments of Transportation 

(SDDOT) and Public Safety, tribal historic 

preservation officers, tribal chairs and presidents, 

and sometimes council members.

This year, SDDOT will hold its 6th Tribal Transportation Safety Summit (visit http://www.sddot.com/

services/civil/tero.aspx for more information) The 

event will be hosted by the Standing Rock Sioux 

Tribe. The summit is an opportunity for State and 

tribal representatives to build relationships and to 

bring together representatives from the 4Es.

Before South Dakota completed its most recent 

SHSP update in 2014, SDDOT presented its draft 

SHSP at the Tribal Safety Summit to get input on 

how to integrate tribal road safety needs into the 

SHSP. Tribes were eager to provide feedback, and

asked if SDDOT would be at the table—to provide 

technical assistance, data, and answer questions—

as tribes created their own road safety plans.

Addressing Data Challenges 

North Dakota is a State with a small population and a 

prominent tribal culture. For decades, NDDOT has 

collaborated on road safety with tribal representatives. The established relationships between tribes 

and NDDOT made it relatively easy to incorporate 

tribal needs into the 2013 SHSP update. In addition, 

North Dakota’s Local Road Safety Program (LRSP) 

has facilitated communication with tribal 

governments to ensure that tribal needs are reflected 

in selected projects. Despite this, data quality is a 

persistent challenge in reaching safety planning 

goals. Only one out of the four tribes in North Dakota 

has equipment compatible with the State's electronic 

crash reporting system. The State is exploring 

options for improving the ability of tribes to access 

and use data in project planning and selection. 

Data-sharing is also a challenge in Washington 

State, where State and tribal planners need crash 

data on tribal roads to make the case for Federal and 

State grant money. But there are barriers, including 

staffing issues and finding the resources it takes to 

process data. To help, the Washington Traffic Safety 

Commission funded an ongoing project that allows 

each tribe’s crash codes to be uploaded 

automatically to the State's electronic ticketing and 

crash reporting system. 

Benefits of Tribal Involvement in SHSPs

In Washington, tribes gain increased awareness 

about the importance of addressing roadway safety, 

and they take ownership of the final SHSP plan. With

ownership, tribes are more likely to use the SHSP as 

a guide and source of information for their own 

transportation plans. Tribal planners, enforcement,

and EMS become familiar with target zero strategies, 

which can be valuable when applying for State grant 

funding. In addition, Washington’s data on behavioral 

factors in fatal and serious injury crashes is now 

more complete and accurate.

In Montana, tribal involvement brings the entire State 

population closer to a cohesive vision zero goal: zero 

fatalities, zero serious injuries. Tribal issues and 

strategies are integrated into Comprehensive 

Highway Safety Plan (CHSP) emphasis areas, and 

there has been a downward trend in AI/AN fatalities. 

Participation from tribal safety representatives also 

helps builds trust between State agencies and tribal 

governments.

In South Dakota, tribal involvement ensures that 

tribal concerns and strategies are addressed in the 

SHSP. Close coordination with tribes has led to 

broad support of the annual traffic safety summit. 

The safety summit is a vehicle for SDDOT staff and 

tribal representatives to interact, and for tribes to 

share low-cost safety improvements. SDDOT staff 

also make a point to be available to help resolve any 

road safety or general transportation issues. 

In North Dakota, ongoing coordination and 

collaboration is a success that begets success. 

Tribal involvement ensures that NDDOT is aware of 

concerns on reservations, especially regarding 

State-owned roads that go through tribal land. Years 

of outreach has led to SHSP updates that include 

strategies to reduce crashes on tribal lands and 

across the State, and there are now full-time Traffic 

Safety Outreach Program Coordinators (funded 

through federal grants – see http://www.nhtsa.gov/

About+NHTSA/Highway+Safety+Grant+Programs

for more information) who serve as contacts on two 

of the State's reservations. 

Read more about these and other success stories 

from tribal-State collaboration on the Noteworthy 

Practices Database website at https://rspcb.safety.

fhwa.dot.gov/noteworthy/Default.aspx. The database 

is housed on the Roadway Safety Professional 

Capacity Building website, at https://rspcb.safety.

fhwa.dot.gov/.

__________

1 See Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, “Tribal 

Road Safety: Get the Facts” web page 

at http://www.cdc.gov/motorvehiclesafety/native/factsheet

.html.) 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 9

FHWA RELIABILITY OF SAFETY 

MANAGEMENT METHODS SERIES:

SAFETY EFFECTIVENESS EVALUATION

By: Stuart Thompson, FHWA Office of Safety, and Frank 

Gross, VHB 

The Reliability of Safety Management Methods: 

Safety Effectiveness Evaluation is the first of a fivepart series of informational guides contrasting stateof-the-art methods with traditional methods used in 

the Roadway Safety Management process. 

The objective of a Safety Effectiveness Evaluation is 

to determine how a particular treatment has affected

safety performance at the treated location(s). 

Agencies often use the results of such evaluations in 

future decisions about allocating funds, changing

policies, or in developing crash modification factors

for use in computing the expected number of 

crashes when applying the same countermeasure at 

a similar site. 

In Reliability of Safety Management Methods: Safety 

Effectiveness Evaluation, readers will find a concise 

description of various methods and tools to support 

their effectiveness evaluations. The objectives of the 

guide are to raise awareness of more reliable 

methods and demonstrate their value. Using 

examples, the guide compares more reliable 

evaluation methods to traditional methods and 

describes how to account for bias, including 

regression-to-the-mean, changes in traffic volume, 

and other changes over time (temporal trends). 

The results from methods that do not properly 

account for potential sources of bias are less reliable 

and may result in less effective decisions. The 

examples presented throughout the guide 

demonstrate the potential magnitude of differences

in results obtained from various methods, and 

reinforce the need to apply methods that are more 

reliable. Otherwise, the results of the evaluation may 

be less accurate and less reliable resulting in 

inefficiency in your decision-making. 

The Reliability of Safety Management Methods: 

Safety Effectiveness Evaluation and other safety 

effectiveness evaluation information are available 

from the Roadway Safety Data Program Toolbox 

at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsdp/

MAKING FRIENDS AND INFLUENCING 

COLLEAGUES: DDSA LAUNCHES 

OUTREACH BLITZ

By: Jerry Roche, FHWA Office of Safety

There continues to be a lot of demand for and 

interest in technical assistance and resources 

promoted under the EDC Data-Driven Safety 

Analysis (DDSA) initiative. Here is a snapshot of 

some notable activities and products the DDSA team 

has been working on this spring: 

• DDSA Video: The Office of Safety has produced 

the first in a series of videos on Data-Driven 

Safety Analysis (https://youtu.be/Lx7sJktkFVA). 

This video provides an overview of the latest 

generation methodologies and tools for analyzing 

crash and roadway data. These approaches 

enable transportation professionals to make 

more informed safety management and project 

development decisions in order to better target 

highway safety investments and reduce the 

number of severe crashes on roadways. It also 

highlights the stories of State and local transportation professionals who have successfully 

applied these methods at the programmatic and 

project level.

• Safety Analysis in Project Development peer 

exchanges: The DDSA team is preparing to host 

three peer exchanges for 27 State DOTs and the 

Federal Lands Highway Division. Over 140 

transportation professionals from planning, environment, design, traffic operations and safety will 

discuss and exchange ideas on the application of 

predictive methods found in the AASHTO Highway Safety Manual, as well as the benefits and 

challenges associated with incorporating quantitative safety analyses into existing project 

The roadway safety management process.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 10

development processes and procedures. The 

peer exchanges will take place May 24-26 in 

New Orleans, LA; June 21-22 in Sterling, VA; 

and July 13-14 in Kansas City, MO.

• Safety Analysis of Freeways and 

Interchanges training: States continue to show 

strong interest in the Safety Analysis of Freeways 

and Interchanges training. In this course, 

participants learn about crash prediction methodologies for freeway segments and interchanges 

published in the HSM Supplement (2014), as well 

as the Enhanced Interchange Safety Analysis 

Tool (ISATe) and the Interactive Highway Safety 

Design Model (IHSDM). To date, 13 workshops 

have been conducted in only 7 months. In 

addition, another 13 States have expressed 

interest in hosting the workshop in the future. For 

more information or to schedule this workshop for 

your State, download the Data-Driven Safety 

Analysis–Safety Analysis of Freeway Segments 

and Interchanges flyer, available 

at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/

everydaycounts/event_safety_analysis_freeways

_interchanges.pdf

• DDSA with the Assist: In April, the DDSA 

initiative surpassed the 100 request threshold for 

assistance provided since the EDC-3 supported 

effort began in 2015! So far, 40 States have 

taken advantage of the FREE technical 

assistance provided under EDC-3. Requests 

include training workshops on such topics as the 

Systemic Safety Project Selection Tool, 

assessments such as those conducted under the 

Roadway Data Improvement Program, reviews 

such as helping to identify opportunities to 

improve a State’s safety analysis procedures, 

and project-level technical assistance in 

analyzing an urban freeway’s expected safety 

performance. To request DDSA assistance in 

furthering your agency’s safety analysis efforts, 

please contact your FHWA Division Office.

ADVANCING ROAD DIETS THROUGH 

PEER EXCHANGES

By: Rebecca Crowe, FHWA Office of Safety

As one of the initiatives included in the Every Day 

Counts (EDC-3) program, Road Diets are a low-cost 

measure that improves safety, calms traffic, and

takes into account the needs of all roadway users. A 

typical project involves converting a four-lane 

undivided roadway to two through lanes separated 

by a two-way left-turn lane and using the additional 

roadway width for dedicated bicycle lanes, parking, 

or sidewalks. FHWA is partnering with State and 

local stakeholders to accelerate the advancement of 

Road Diets as a potential low-cost measure to 

reduce crashes, injuries, and deaths in busy 

corridors while improving mobility and quality of life 

for all roadway users. 

As a part of this initiative, the Western Region Road 

Diet Peer to Peer Exchange was held in 

Albuquerque, New Mexico, April 12–13, 2016. States 

were invited based on their EDC Road Diet 

implementation status and goals as well as regional 

proximity. The attending States included New Mexico 

(host), California, Nebraska, Oregon, Washington, 

Oklahoma, and South Dakota. Over 40 multidisciplinary representatives from FHWA, State DOTs, and 

local agencies had the opportunity to ask questions, 

exchange information, and share learning 

experiences with their peers on various Road Diet 

topics, such as: 

• Identifying and evaluating candidate projects,

• Marketing and outreach for proposed projects,

• Design considerations and issues,

• Multimodal accommodations,

• Before and after evaluation factors and 

performance metrics, 

• Institutionalizing a Road Diet program and, 

• Policies that encourage Road Diets.

Peer exchange participants tour a completed Road 

Diet project in Albuquerque, NM

Source: Ken Sides
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 11

Nearly 200 Road Diet projects have been implemented among the organizations represented at this 

peer exchange. The experience of attendees 

ranged from a State DOT just beginning to 

implement its first Road Diet to the cities of Portland, 

Oregon and Seattle, Washington, which have 

implemented a combined total of more than 100 

Road Diet projects.

The participants explored how Road Diet projects 

can further enhance safety, accommodate the use of 

other transportation modes, encourage economic 

development, and improve overall livability along a 

corridor. Examples of non-traditional Road Diet 

projects discussed at the peer exchange include 

one-way streets, divided roadways with raised 

medians, and five-lane to three-lane conversions.

State and local agencies also learned about Road 

Diet projects that incorporate modern roundabouts to 

further reduce congestion and increase safety for all 

users. The design of these projects offers the added 

benefit of providing space for public art reflecting 

local community history and values. 

Participants discussed and shared a variety of Road 

Diet stories relating to items such as: lane widths, 

traffic diversion, parking, access management, 

appropriate traffic volume thresholds, and funding.

A modern roundabout in Albuquerque, NM showcases a 

Road Diet project that provides space for public art. 

Sculpture by: Ed Haddaway; Photo by: City of 

Albuquerque 1% for Art Program

One unique feature of the peer exchange included 

an evening field trip to completed and potential Road 

Diet projects. Debbie Bauman, Planner from the City 

of Albuquerque, facilitated the tour and discussed 

the various considerations for candidate Road Diets.

New Mexico’s State Traffic Engineer, Afshin Jian, 

stated the Road Diet peer exchange “was a great 

learning experience.”

As the meeting concluded, each participating State 

made a specific commitment to work towards further 

institutionalizing Road Diets.

Planning for additional peer exchanges is underway 

for other States wishing to advance Road Diet 

implementation. 

If you’re interested in receiving Road Diet technical 

assistance or scheduling a free Road Diet workshop, 

please contact Rebecca Crowe 

(rebecca.crowe@dot.gov) or Keith Harrison 

(keith.harrison@dot.gov) at the FHWA Office of 

Safety. To learn more about the benefits of installing 

a Road Diet, visit: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/

road_diets/.

ROAD DIET ROUNDUP: RECENT 

ACTIVITIES AND UPCOMING EVENTS 

UPDATE 

By: Becky Crowe, FHWA Office of Safety

The Office of Safety’s Road Diet team has big plans 

underway for outreach activities in the coming 

months, including: 

• Hosting a Road Diet Peer Exchange on June 8-

9 for the New England States. This event will 

immediately follow the 2016 Northeast 

Transportation Safety Conference (June 7–8) in 

Massachusetts. 

• Hosting a Road Diet Peer Exchange in 

Tennessee for the central States. The Peer 

Exchange is tentatively scheduled to take place 

on August 24–25 in Nashville. 

• Providing a Road Diet Workshop in 

Charlottesville, Virginia, on August 23, 2016, 

facilitated by the FHWA Resource Center.

• Holding two Road Diet webinars (dates TBD):

 Deciding Whether a Road Diet is a Good 

Solution: This webinar will provide 

information on how to identify candidate 

roads for Road Diets, feasibility/evaluation 

criteria, design aspects, and other unique 

considerations. 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 12

 Public Outreach for Road Diets: How Do 

You Answer the Tough Questions?: This 

webinar will focus on ways to educate the 

public on Road Diets.

• Presenting on several Road Diet topics and have 

a Road Diet display at the ITE Annual Meeting

on August 14–17, in Anaheim, CA. 

Staff are also in the process of developing a Road 

Diet Bicycle and Pedestrian CMF. 

A series of information products will soon be 

available, including:

• A Road Diet “Myth Buster” leaflet.

• A Road Diet Policy flier.

• A Q & A flier.

• A Road Diets and Safe Routes to School leaflet.

Finally, a Road Diet video that will focus on all the 

benefits of this proven safety countermeasure is 

currently under development. The experiences of 

five states (FL, AZ, CA, WA, and TN) will be 

highlighted in the video. 

Please visit http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/ for 

more Road Diet information and resources, and 

visit https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovation/everydayco

unts/edc-3/roaddiets.cfm for more information on 

upcoming events.

FHWA ISSUES FINAL RULE ON NEW 

HSIP DATA REQUIREMENTS

By: Robert Pollack, FHWA Office of Safety

The FHWA recently completed two rulemaking 

processes that affect State Safety Programs (see 

articles on pages 2-4 for additional details). Final 

rules were issued for the Highway Safety Improvement Program and for Highway Safety Improvement 

Program and for the development of Safety 

Performance Measures. Probably the most 

significant change is the development of a subset of 

the Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) 

that are required to be collected on all public roads.

The MIRE is a recommended listing of over 200 

roadway and traffic elements that are critical to 

safety management. This listing was developed to 

enhance a State’s ability to use more advanced 

analytic techniques, such as those in the Highway 

Safety Manual. The MAP-21 and FAST Act 

legislation required FHWA to establish a subset of 

the total listing of MIRE elements to support the 

HSIP. 

A subset of 37 MIRE elements was developed and is 

referred to as the Fundamental Data Elements 

(FDEs). The FDEs are based on roadway function

classification and surface type and are divided into 

three categories: 

• Non-Local Paved Roads

• Local Paved Roads

• Unpaved Roads

More in-depth information on the FDEs may be 

found in guidance used by the Office of Safety 

at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/guidance/guides

afetydata.cfm.

The FAST Act contains a provision that allows States 

to opt out of collecting the FDEs on unpaved roads. 

However, if a State chooses not to collect the FDEs 

on unpaved roads, it cannot use HSIP funds for 

safety improvements on those roads. In addition, if 

the unpaved road is on tribal lands, the State must 

demonstrate that it has consulted with the tribe 

regarding the decision not to collect the FDEs on 

those unpaved roads.

States are expected to develop a plan regarding how 

they intend to collect the FDEs by July 1, 2017. Each

State’s plan must incorporate specific, quantifiable, 

and measurable anticipated improvements for collecting the FDEs. Each plan must be included as part of 

the State’s Traffic Records Strategic Plan, which is 

developed to qualify for NHTSA’s Section 405c, 

State Traffic Safety System Improvement Grants.

The FHWA intends to support the efforts of State 

and local agencies to comply with the requirements 

for the acquisition of the FDEs through various 

means. The FHWA Office of Safety issued Guidance 

on State Safety Data Systems that includes 

additional information about the FDE requirements. 

This Guidance may be found on the FHWA Office of 

Safety website at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/

guidance/guidesafetydata.cfm

In addition, the Office of Safety is planning to 

develop materials and programming to provide more 

information to agencies about the MIRE FDEs. State 

and local agencies may also request direct technical 

assistance for data related issues through the Data 

and Analysis Technical Assistance Program located 

on the Roadway Safety Data Program website 

at http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/rsdp/technical.aspx. For 

further information or questions about the FDEs,or 

the availability of technical assistance please contact 

Robert Pollack at Robert.pollack@dot.gov.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 13

A REVIEW OF TRIBAL TRANSPORTATION 

SAFETY PROVISIONS IN THE FAST ACT

By Ron Hall, President, Bubar & Hall Consulting, LLC

In 2016, roadway safety is an impending and critical 

challenge facing tribal governments. While the 

overall national trend for fatalities in vehicle crashes 

is historically decreasing, the number of fatal crashes 

on Native American reservations has increased over 

the last few years. The fact that crash data indicate 

an increase despite a lack of crash data on tribal 

lands means there is a possibility that those fatal 

crash rates are actually understated. Without more 

reliable data, it is difficult for safety professionals to 

understand the nature of the problem and for tribes 

to develop effective strategies to respond.

On December 4, 2015, President Obama signed a 5-

year, $305 billion transportation bill called the "Fixing 

America's Surface Transportation Act" (FAST Act). 

The bill passed Congress with broad bipartisan 

support (House: 356 in favor, 65 opposed; and 

Senate: 83 in favor, 16 opposed). Within the bill itself 

are provisions that tribal governments can use to 

implement transportation safety programs, including 

resources for applying effective technologies for

crash reporting and strategies proven to reduce 

motor vehicle crashes, save lives, and reduce 

injuries. The FAST Act also mandates two national 

reports assessing the quality of roadway safety data 

in Indian Country. Findings will be incorporated into 

future policies and initiatives. 

Tribal Transportation Program Funds 

In general, the Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) 

will benefit from increased authorizations totaling 

$2.425 billion over the next 5 years.

FAST Act Tribal Transportation Program (TTP) 

Funding (dollars in millions)

Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Authorization $465 $475 $485 $495 $505 

Note: It is possible that changes to HSIP spending 

criteria could apply to TTSP spending eligibility, but 

that interpretation is yet to be determined.

This funding is distributed to tribes under a formula 

determined by the FAST Act's predecessor, Moving 

Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21). In 

addition to road construction, TTP funds can be used 

for a wide range of eligible activities, including any 

transportation project eligible for assistance under 23 

U.S.C. that is located within, or that provides access 

to, tribal land or is associated with a tribal 

government. This includes virtually all transportation 

safety activities authorized under Federal law.

The FAST Act builds on the legacy of previous 

transportation legislation by emphasizing data-driven 

planning and project selection. Tribes continue to 

have lead responsibility for roadway safety on 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) and tribally owned 

roads. Tribes that invest in safety data collection and 

program reporting expertise will find funding and 

support resources that will assist in tribal efforts to 

save lives and reduce injuries from motor vehicle 

crashes. Since the remaining Federal safety 

programs are competitive and designed to direct 

funds to verifiable safety issues, the TTP funds are 

the only secure source of tribal transportation funds 

available.

Tribal Transportation Program Safety 

Funds (TTPSF)

Administered by Office of Federal Lands Highway in 

the Federal Highway Administration, the TTPSF 

emphasizes the development of strategic 

transportation safety plans using a data-driven 

process to help tribes determine how transportation 

safety needs will be addressed in tribal communities. 

The FAST Act did not directly alter the Tribal 

Transportation Program Safety Fund that was 

created in MAP-21, although it did increase base 

TTP funding. (Note: It is possible that changes to 

HSIP spending criteria (see below) could apply to 

TTSP spending eligibility, but that interpretation is 

yet to be determined.) Under the FAST Act, 2

percent of the available TTP funds are set aside 

each year to address safety issues in tribal 

communities in the TTPSF (this totals approximately 

$9.3 million, subject to take downs in FY 2016).

Funding is based on competitive proposals solicited 

in a Notice of Funding Opportunity (NOFO) each 

year. In 2015, the TTPSF funded projects of all 

eligible types, including projects that are eligible 

under the Highway Safety Improvement Program 

based on four categories:

1. Safety plans and safety planning activities (40 

percent)

2. Engineering improvements (30 percent)

3. Enforcement and emergency services 

improvements (20 percent)

4. Education programs (10 percent) 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 14

The 2016 NOFO for the TTPSF has not yet been 

published.

Additional information on the TTPSF is on the FHWA 

Tribal Transportation Safety Fund website

http://flh.fhwa.dot.gov/programs/ttp/safety/ttpsf.htm, 

or contact Russell Garcia, TTP Safety Program 

Manager, at Russell.Garcia@dot.gov, or Adam 

Larsen, TTP Safety Engineer, 

at Adam.Larsen@dot.gov.

Indian Highway Safety Program (IHSP)

The Indian Highway Safety Program (IHSP) has 

been in place since the Highway Safety Act of 1966 

created what is now 23 U.S.C. Section 402. The 

FAST Act did not change the IHSP. Although the 

funds originate in the USDOT National Highway 

Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), the IHSP is 

administered by the U.S. Department of the Interior's 

Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) Office of Justice 

Services. The BIA IHSP is performance-based and 

data driven. According to the instructions for FY 

2016 IHSP applications: 

"A traffic safety problem must be identified and all 

applications must contain measurable targets and 

performance measures and be justified by 

data. Insufficient data to justify a traffic safety 

problem will significantly reduce the possibility 

of funding for your Tribe."

IHSP funds are intended to supplement an existing 

traffic safety program within a tribal government. 

Applications are accepted for:

1. Law enforcement full-time

2. Law enforcement overtime

3. Efforts to combat impaired driving 

4. Child passenger safety

5. Traffic records

To learn more, visit the Indian Highway Safety 

Program page at: http://ruralsafetycenter.org/

resources/list/indian-highway-safety-program-ihsp/

Highway Safety Improvement Program 

(HSIP)

Tribes are urged to look closely at the opportunities 

presented in the Highway Safety Improvement 

Program (HSIP). Even in today's difficult fiscal 

environment, the HSIP has grown significantly. 

During 2005-2009 SAFETEA-LU authorized the 

HSIP at $5.06 billion over 4 years, and during 2013 

and 2014, MAP-21 authorized the HSIP at 

$4.8 billion over 2 years. 

MAP-21 Highway Safety Improvement Program 

(HSIP) Funding (dollars in billions)

Year 2013 2014

Estimated Funding $ 2.39 $ 2.41 

The FAST Act provides $11.586 billion over 

5 years, as follows:

FAST Act Highway Safety Improvement Program 

(HSIP) Funding (dollars in billions)

Year 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Estimated 

Funding $2.226 $2.275 $2.318 $2.360 $2.407

Tribal governments are eligible recipients of HSIP 

funds available to the States. In fact, each State 

must provide at least 40 percent of all Federal funds 

apportioned under the HSIP to be expended by the 

political subdivisions of the State, including tribal 

governments. Tribes have to compete at a State 

level for HSIP funds. One important change in the 

FAST Act is to remove from eligibility the use of 

HSIP funds for non-infrastructure safety programs, 

such as general education and enforcement 

activities. Many States are using the Strategic 

Highway Safety Plan process to engage tribes about 

their participation in State HSIP funding.

Visit the FY 2016 Federal-Aid Highway Program 

Apportionments table at https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/

legsregs/directives/notices/n4510802/n4510802_t1.c

fm for each state's apportionment under the Fast Act. 

FAST Act Studies Directed at Safety and 

Data in Indian Country

The FAST Act requires two national studies on tribal 

safety data be conducted by the Secretary of 

Transportation. The first, due 1 year after enactment, 

will examine the quality of transportation safety data 

collected by states, counties, and tribes for 

transportation safety systems and the relevance of 

that data to Native American tribes. Its purpose is to 

improve the way agencies collect and share data on 

crashes on Native American reservations. It also 

requires identification of Federal transportation funds 

provided to tribes by agencies other than the USDOT 

and the Department of the Interior. Finally, States, 

counties and tribes will be provided with options and 

best practices for transitioning to a paperless 

transportation safety data reporting system that uses 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 15

data to improve safety for tribal lands and 

communities.

The second study, due within 2 years of enactment, 

must identify and evaluate options for improving 

safety on public roads on tribal lands. Both of these 

reports are to be developed in consultation with the 

Secretary of the Interior, the Attorney General, states 

and tribes.

Federal Lands Highway will author these reports on 

behalf of the Secretary of Transportation and will do 

so in coordination with the Tribal Transportation 

Safety Management System Steering Committee. If 

you are interested in being interviewed during the 

development of these reports, please contact Adam 

Larsen, Adam.Larsen@dot.gov 360-619-7751.

Other National FAST Act Safety 

Provisions

There are several other nationwide roadway safety 

provisions of note. The FAST Act legislation:

• Removes eligibility of HSIP funds for most noninfrastructure safety programs, such as general 

education and enforcement activities, which were 

allowed in MAP-21. 

• Requires the Federal Motor Carrier Safety 

Administration (FMCSA) to remove safety scores 

assigned to truck companies from a public 

website. 

• Requests that USDOT conduct a study on the 

impacts of marijuana-impaired driving. 

• Prohibits rental car agencies and car dealers with 

fleets of more than 35 cars from renting vehicles 

that have been recalled but not repaired. The bill 

does not require used-car dealers to repair 

recalled vehicles before selling them. 

• Triples the maximum fine the NHTSA can levy 

against an automaker that violates safety defect 

regulations from $35 million to $105 million per 

violation. 

• Doubles the time automakers would have to 

retain safety records from five years to ten years. 

• Requires the government to revise the five-star 

rating system for new cars to reflect not only the 

ability of a vehicle to protect passengers in a 

crash, but also whether the vehicle comes 

equipped with crash avoidance systems like 

automatic braking and lane-change monitoring. 

• Provides $21 million for research into in-vehicle 

sensor technology that can determine if a driver 

has a dangerously high level of alcohol in his or 

her body and automatically lock the ignition.

FRANK JULIAN: A LIFETIME OF 

ACHIEVEMENTS IN SAFETY

By: Patrick Hasson, Manager, National Technical Service 

Team for Safety and Design

The Howard Anderson Lifetime Achievement Award 

recognizes current or retired Federal Highway 

Administration (FHWA) employees who exemplify 

outstanding and significant service to the safety 

discipline during their careers and leadership through 

continuous efforts to 

champion safety both 

within FHWA and in 

concert with external 

partners. Mr. Frank 

Julian, Safety Engineer, 

recently received this 

prestigious recognition. 

Frank works in the 

FHWA Resource Center 

office in Atlanta, Georgia. 

Over a career spanning 

39 years, including 10 

years working for State 

and private sector organizations, Frank has 

exemplified leadership, innovation, and dedication as 

a true champion of roadway safety. He is a tireless 

advocate for the promotion and adoption of leadingedge ideas and good practices. His leadership skills 

allow him to connect stakeholders both within FHWA 

and among external partners to advance lifesaving 

countermeasures on the Nation’s roadways.

Frank says “without passion for your work it is just a 

job and I don’t need a job.” Frank is passionate 

everyday about saving lives. He has leveraged his 

expert knowledge and experience in such areas as 

roadside safety and design, highway-rail grade 

crossings, and pedestrian safety to encourage 

implementation, develop design manuals, and assist 

in project design. This combination of passion and 

expert knowledge makes Frank a formidable 

proponent of good practices and great technologies; 

his advice is hard to ignore.

Identifying promising new technologies and 

promoting their implementation is at the forefront of 

Frank’s priorities. For example, Frank was an early 

promoter of technologies such as cable median 

barriers, rumble strips/stripes, Safety EdgeSM, high 

friction surface treatments, and horizontal curve 

delineation. All of these have ultimately become 

Every Day Counts initiatives or Proven Safety 

Congratulations to Frank 

Julian, recipient of the 

Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award!
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 16

Countermeasures—in many cases, both. He has 

been credited by our partners on more than one 

occasion for contributing to saving lives in specific 

locations or areas where his expertise was applied.

Two words that describe how valuable Frank Julian 

is to the Federal Highway Administration safety 

discipline are “Call Frank”. He is committed to his 

FHWA colleagues and partners. Frank works many 

hours researching emerging safety treatments and 

knows how to build momentum for emerging safety 

measures. Frank knows how to connect research 

with technical experts in the industry and work with 

vendors to establish viability for safety products. He 

has innovative ideas for deploying the latest 

technologies while still conducting due diligence 

when moving an idea from concept to standard 

treatment. For anyone needing help advancing 

safety in the field, they do not hesitate to “call Frank,” 

and find he usually picks up the phone any hour of 

the day or night.

Frank is considered an encyclopedia of information 

and has become a safety legend in his own right, 

both within FHWA and beyond. Many leaders in the 

safety community have been inspired by Frank’s 

commitment, enthusiasm, innovation and dedication. 

Frank doesn’t talk safety, he LIVES safety. For living 

his passion and making a difference in so many 

people’s lives over a long career, Frank Julian is 

rightfully recognized with Howard Anderson Lifetime 

Achievement Award in safety.

FHWA SEEKS PARTNERS FOR SHRP2

POOLED FUND STUDY

By: Charles Fay, FHWA Office of Safety Research and 

Development

The purpose of the Second Strategic Highway 

Research Program (SHRP 2) is to find strategic 

solutions to three national transportation challenges: 

improving highway safety, reducing congestion, and 

improving methods for renewing roads and bridges. 

In the highway safety focus area, SHRP2 has 

developed new and comprehensive data that 

provides a wealth of information about driving 

behavior, including video and other sensor data 

collected during crashes, near-crashes, and nonevent driving (exposure information). SHRP2 safety 

data consists of two large databases – the 

Naturalistic Driving Study (NDS) database and the 

Roadway Information Database (RID). These two 

databases can be linked to associate driver behavior 

with the actual roadway characteristics and driving 

conditions.

FHWA’s Office of Safety R&D initiated a Pooled 

Fund Study to support groundbreaking research 

using data from the SHRP2 NDS database. The goal 

is to advance the development of implementable 

solutions for State and local transportation agencies 

with an emphasis on the broad areas of safety, 

operations, and planning. This effort will entail very 

active participation from member agencies to 

determine the research that is undertaken. The 

objectives and scope of the pooled fund include the 

following:

• To conduct groundbreaking research using the 

SHRP 2 NDS data and rid that will result in a 

more efficient, reliable, and inherently safer 

experience for road users. 

• To advance development of implementable 

solutions that address high-priority issues among 

state and local transportation agencies with an 

emphasis on the broad areas of safety, 

operations, and planning.

• To create a venue for highway practitioners to 

share information and collaborate on research 

that advances their individual disciplines and 

addresses such cross-cutting areas as the 

advancement of a connected-automated highway 

system.

• To communicate and work with others in order to 

leverage research results and to work toward the 

common goal of a safer and more reliable 

experience for the road user. 

Scope of Work

A Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) will be 

appointed to direct the pooled fund activities. The 

TAC will pursue projects with an emphasis in safety, 

operations, and planning. The TAC will determine 

yearly funding allocations for research. Due to the 

uniqueness of this pooled fund and its cross-cutting 

approach, the TAC should provide adequate 

representation of the focus areas in the portfolio of 

projects. The TAC may pursue activities focused on 

topics that overlap one or more of these areas. Such 

overlap may support advancing a connected and 

automated highway system or other high-priority 

areas identified by the TAC. The TAC will define the 

research needs for the pooled fund, select the 

projects to be conducted, approve research teams, 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 17

and oversee the work to ensure the objectives are 

met. 

FHWA’s Safety Training and Analysis Center (STAC) 

will manage the pooled fund and, with oversight and 

approval of the TAC, develop work plans to address

the TAC’s research needs, manage research

contracting, and each individual project. Projects will

primarily focus on advancing implementable 

solutions for State and local transportation agencies. 

This could include development and improvement of 

countermeasures, development and improvement of 

predictive models and design guides, policy 

recommendations, etc. 

The TAC and STAC will identify appropriate 

mechanisms for the deployment and implementation 

of pooled fund results. To support the TAC, FHWA 

envisions three assessments—one for safety, one 

for operations, and one for planning—will be initiated 

at the start of this pooled fund study. These 

assessments will be used to support the TAC in 

developing the group’s research needs. When 

appropriate, the selected research efforts will use 

other datasets that could supplement SHRP 2 data 

to meet project objectives. 

A minimum contribution of $50,000 per State per 

year for a 5-year period, or a total of $250,000 per 

State is suggested. For more information, please 

contact Charles Fay at Charles.fay@dot.gov

NEW ROADWAY LIGHTING DATABASE 

AVAILABLE IN JULY!

By: Joseph Cheung, FHWA Office of Safety and Craig 

Thor, FHWA Office of Safety Research and Development

FHWA and its contractor the Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (VTTI), conducted a project to study

Adaptive Lighting that, along with other products, 

resulted in a Roadway Lighting Database containing 

in-situ lighting measurement data for approximately 

2,000 miles of roadways across the Nation.

This Roadway Lighting Database houses roadway 

lighting measurements for seven different States. 

The data collected contains high-resolution 

measurements depicting horizontal illuminance, 

vertical illuminance, luminance, and glare (from 

oncoming traffic and other external light sources)

along the roadways during nighttime. States included

in the data collection effort are California, Delaware, 

Minnesota, North Carolina, Vermont, Virginia, and 

Washington. All of the data is geolocated so that 

researchers can link it to other datasets, including

crash and roadway information. Field lighting 

performance data were collected using the Roadway 

Lighting Mobile Measurement System (RLMMS) 

developed by VTTI. 

When it comes to roadway lighting-related policies, 

different State agencies frequently take very different 

approaches. Some provide continuous lighting on 

major freeway corridors as a statewide policy. Others

only install roadway lighting at locations where 

complex roadway and/or traffic features are present 

(e.g., interchanges). There is also an increasing 

number of States that have adopted the policy of not 

owning, operating, or maintaining roadway lighting 

on any State routes. While a number of roadway

lighting guides are available nationwide, when facing 

the “to light or not to light” dilemma, States frequently 

feel shorthanded when they need to make an 

informed decision relevant to roadway lighting and 

safety. Many lighting factors can affect crash risks, 

such as the level of vertical and horizontal 

illuminance, roadway luminance, and lighting 

uniformity. 

Previous research on the safety impact of roadway 

lighting mostly focused on how the presence of 

lighting affected crash rates by comparing highways 

with and without lighting and the relationship 

between day and night crashes (see P.C. Box, 

“Major road accident reduction by illumination,”

NEW! Training Video on Road Safety 

Culture Released

The National Center for Rural Road Safety has 

released its first training video, “Introduction to 

Road Safety Culture.” Produced expressly for 

State, local, and tribal agencies that manage rural 

roads, the video introduces the concept of road 

safety culture and explains how it affects behaviors of drivers. National expert Dr. Nicholas Ward 

of Montana State University presents methods 

that can be used to understand the safety culture 

that exists in a given community, and describes 

examples of successful initiatives to apply this 

information toward public outreach campaigns 

that encourage safer driver behavior. To view the 

video, visit the Safety Center website at: 

http://ruralsafetycenter.org/resources/multimed

ia
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 18

 

VTTI’s Roadway Lighting Mobile Measurement System.

Source: Gibbons, R. & Edwards, C. (prepared by Mutmansky, M., Givler, T., Garcia, J., & Clanton, N.). (2010). Advanced 

street lighting technologies assessment project – City of San Jose. Blacksburg, VA: Virginia Tech Transportation Institute.

illumination,” Transportation Research Record, 

1247(1989): 32–38).Such studies lacked the support 

of detailed lighting measurement data and therefore 

could not identify exactly what level of lighting is 

needed to maintain safety.

The Roadway Lighting Database contains multi-state 

scale, in-situ, high-resolution lighting measurements, 

which makes this database the first of its kind as a 

publicly accessible resource, giving stakeholders the 

unique opportunity to conduct a wide range of 

nighttime safety analyses. The availability of the 

Roadway Lighting Database also enables further 

improvement of the current roadway lighting design 

guidelines by potentially providing critical knowledge 

relevant to how much, what type of, where, and 

when lighting should be used. The Roadway Lighting 

Database is a powerful tool for States during 

roadway lighting-related decision-making processes

at both system and project levels.

FHWA is making the Roadway Lighting Database 

available to public through the Highway Safety 

Information System (HSIS). Interested users may

request the lighting measurement data by State, 

county, or roadway (for HSIS States only). 

Depending on the processing time, users may also 

request lighting data based on lighting levels or 

latitude/longitude coordinates. Users may submit 

data requests online at the HSIS data request 

website (http://www.hsisinfo.org/) or contact HSIS 

data managers directly using the contact information 

on the HSIS website.

Additionally, FHWA encourages the submission of 

additional field roadway lighting measurement data 

by other stakeholders, particularly State and local 

agencies and individuals conducting work for such 

agencies to further improve the database. To submit 

data, users should contact the HSIS team using the 

contact information on the HSIS website to obtain 

detailed requirements on data format, contents, 

quality, and metadata. 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 19

FHWA CONDUCTS SAFETY-RELATED 

PERFORMANCE-BASED PLANNING STATE 

OF THE PRACTICE REVIEW

By Lorrie Lau, FHWA Office of Planning

FHWA recently conducted a state-of-the-practice 

review to better understand how State DOTs and 

metropolitan planning organizations (MPO) are 

addressing safety-related, performance-based 

planning within their long-range plans. Although this 

is an internal review, FHWA intends to produce a 

public report summarizing the results to support 

DOTs and MPOs in their safety-related performancebased planning. The review includes a baseline 

assessment for DOTs in all 50 States and the District 

of Columbia based on their statewide long-range 

transportation plans (SLRP), and a selection of 20 

metropolitan transportation plans (MTP). The 

baseline will be available to benchmark future 

progress in considering safety within performancebased planning. The review team consists of 

representatives from the FHWA Offices of Planning 

and Safety and the Volpe Center.

Initial findings of the SLRP review indicate that 

although almost every State addresses safety in 

some capacity in its SLRP, the extent to which 

States include safety in performance-based planning 

varies, as do the methods they use for tracking 

safety performance. Broad findings from the MTP 

review are generally consistent with the findings of 

the SLRP review with a few notable differences, 

such as the greater degree of detail provided by a 

few of the MPOs studied to describe data sources 

and monitoring methods.

These results suggest that there are opportunities for 

FHWA to support improved consistency and 

progress by States and MPOs both individually and 

as a group. Benchmarking against the baseline for 

SLRPs produced by this study will help FHWA 

identify trends and plan for future activities ranging 

from research to technical assistance. It will also 

support an enhanced focus on planning oversight 

and help FHWA identify notable practices among 

some States and MPOs that can provide model 

approaches for their peers.

INTEGRATING SPEED MANAGEMENT 

WITHIN THE THREE SAFETY FOCUS 

AREAS

By: Guan Xu, FHWA Office of Safety Technologies, and 

Abdul Zineddin, FHWA Office of Safety Research and 

Development

In 2013, there were approximately 33,000 traffic 

fatalities in the United States. Roadway departure, 

intersection, and pedestrian and bicycle crashes 

collectively contribute to 90 percent of the total traffic 

fatalities nationwide. That’s why FHWA has identified 

Roadway Departure, Intersection, and Pedestrian 

and Bicycle as the three safety focus areas for 

implementing the focused approach to improve road 

safety.

Speeding, defined as exceeding the posted speed 

limit or driving too fast for conditions, is a contributing 

factor in about 30 percent of all fatalities, resulting in 

nearly 10,000 deaths each year. The percentage of 

speeding-related traffic deaths has remained largely 

consistent for many years. Within the FHWA Safety 

Focus Areas, nearly 40 percent of roadway departure fatal crashes and 20 percent of intersection fatal 

crashes are speeding related. Although the percentage of pedestrian fatalities that are speeding related 

is low, travel speed at impact greatly increases the 

severity of pedestrian crashes. For impact speeds 

below 25 mph, it is most likely that pedestrian injuries will be slight, but at 45 mph or higher, injuries 

are likely to be fatal. Integrating a speed management component into each of the three focus areas 

is essential to reducing fatalities and achieving safety 

goals.

To assist State and local agencies with integrating 

speed management into their safety policies, plans, 

and practices to reduce speeding-related crashes as 

well as to lessen the number of overall roadway 

departure, intersection, and pedestrian and bicycle

crashes, the FHWA office of Safety has recently 

developed a report that provides speed management 

strategies for the three safety focus programs. The 

strategies were developed based on the findings 

from the investigation of current practices for speed 

management at State and local levels and through 

an evaluation of the role of speeding in crashes and 

safety-critical events. The report resulting from this 

study provides information on national speedingrelated crash trends, promotes a speeding-related 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 20

crash data analysis approach, and recommends

strategies and countermeasures for integrating 

speed management into an agency’s overall policies 

as well as its roadway departure, intersection, and 

pedestrian/bicyclist safety programs. State and local 

agencies should find the information in the report 

helpful for integrating speed management within the 

three safety focus areas to reduce crashes.

In addition, to encourage States and local 

governments to integrate speed management into 

the safety focus areas, an NHI course has been 

developed and is currently being piloted. This course 

provides instruction and facilitated discussion 

regarding speed management principles and their 

applications in these focus areas. This course is 

designed to:

• Assist participants in identifying the speeding 

problem as it relates to the three focus areas of 

intersections, roadway departure, and 

pedestrians and bicyclist safety; setting 

appropriate speed limits; and developing speed

management action plans.

• Teach engineering strategies that are effective in 

reducing speeding-related roadway fatalities 

occurring within the three safety areas.

The final report, Integrating Speed Management 

within Roadway Departure, Intersections, and 

Pedestrian and Bicyclist Safety Focus Areas, is 

posted on FHWA Speed Management website 

at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/speedmgt/ref_mats/. 

The course NHI course will be available beginning in 

the summer of 2016. 

2016 NATIONAL WORK ZONE 

AWARENESS WEEK “DON’T BE THAT

DRIVER”

By: Martha C. Kapitanov, FHWA Office of Operations

Every spring, FHWA partners with the American 

Traffic Safety Services Association (ATSSA), the 

American Association of State and Highway 

Transportation Officials (AASHTO), the American 

Road and Transportation Builders Association 

(ARTBA), and other agencies to increase public 

awareness of work zone and worker safety through a 

national media campaign. 

This year’s National Work Zone Awareness Week 

was held on April 11-15, and the kick-off event took 

place on April 12th in the vicinity of the I-75 widening 

project just outside Toledo, Ohio. 

The 2016 theme—“Don’t Be THAT Driver”--

reinforces the importance of constantly being alert 

and prepared for sudden changes in and around 

work zones. In 2014, there were 669 traffic-related 

fatalities, 31,251 injuries, 116 worker fatalities, and 

246 fatal crashes involving large trucks and buses in 

work zones. In addition, distracted driving was a 

factor in 16 percent of fatal crashes in work zones, 

while speeding was a factor in 29 percent. The 

FHWA 2016 NWZA Fact Sheet is available 

at http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/outreach/nwzaw_f

actsheet/nwzaw_2016.htm

Based on the Bureau of Labor Statistics, there were 

116 worker fatalities in and around work zones in 

2014, a 9% increase from 2013. The leading cause 

of death in the road and bridge construction sector is 

worker runovers, backovers, and falls. These 

incidents are often preventable if workers are 

properly trained and follow established safety 

practices. 

One way to prevent these fatalities is by developing 

an Internal Traffic Control Plan (ITCP). An ITCP is a 

method or protocol to coordinate worker, work 

vehicle, and equipment movements in the activity 

area of a work zone and to inform all parties 

operating within the activity area about the locations 

of others. For information on how to develop an 

ITCP, 

visit: http://www.workzonesafety.org/publication/guid

ance-developing-internal-traffic-control-plans-itcpsfor-work-zones/

A series of animated videos following on-site investigations during work zone accidents and incidents 

available at https://www.workzonesafety.org/dataresources/niosh_face_videos/ was developed under 

two separate grants (FHWA Work Zone Safety Grant 

Program and an Occupational Safety and Health 

Administration (OSHA) Grant).

FHWA is constantly developing new tools and 

resources to assist the public and private sectors in 

minimizing congestion and improving work zone 

management. The Smarter Work Zones (SWZ) 

initiative is one of the three innovations focused on 

safety and mobility under round three of the Every 

Day Counts (EDC-3) initiative. SWZ promotes the 

use of innovative strategies to enhance road project

coordination and use of technology applications to 

dynamically manage and minimize work zone safety 

and mobility impacts. For more information on future 
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 21

and past SWZ webinars, training, FHWA-led peer 

exchanges and other tools, please check the SWZ 

Toolkit online https://www.workzonesafety.org/swz/

In addition to FHWA-developed products, the FHWA 

Work Zone Safety Grants Program has generated a 

wealth of products, publications, and training courses 

for roadway construction industry practitioners since 

2006. More detailed information on each product or 

resource, including access to the materials, is available at http://www.workzonesafety.org/

fhwa_wz_grant.

Several agencies also provide additional data 

resources:

• NHTSA Analysis Reporting System (FARS) 2014 

Annual Report File (ARF).

• FMCSA, "Large Truck and Bus Crash Facts 

2013," FMCSA-RRA-15-004 (Washington, DC: 

FMCSA, April 2015). Available 

at: https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/safety/data-andstatistics/large-truck-and-bus-crash-facts-2013.

• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 

National Institute for Occupational Safety and 

Health (NIOSH), "Highway Work Zone Safety" 

at http://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/highwayworkz

ones/default.html.

For more information regarding work zone 

management training, regulations, resources, and 

tools visit the FHWA Work Zone Management 

website at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/workzones and 

the National Work Zone Safety Information 

Clearinghouse at http://www.workzonesafety.org

MOVING FROM A TRADITIONAL HSIS TO

A SAFETY DATA RESOURCE: THE HSIS

GIS PROCESSING PILOT STUDY

By: Ana Maria Eigen, D.Sc., FHWA Office of Safety 

Research and Development 

In the winter 2016 issue of Safety Compass, the 

Highway Safety Information System (HSIS) VI was 

introduced as the template for the future as we enter 

the era of big data. Further, by building upon the 

foundation of linking the best crash, roadway 

inventory, and traffic volume data for the seven 

participating States, HSIS is expanding its role within 

big data by: developing tools, serving as a 

surrogate for FHWA big data, and streamlining 

data extraction using next current-generation 

tools to develop next-generation data. In these 

three areas, HSIS is starting to depart from traditional data acquisition, management, and delivery to 

keep pace with the changing computing landscape 

and to balance escalating costs with shrinking 

budgets. HSIS is evolving from a traditional data 

acquisition system into a safety resource that is 

populated by disparate data sources and is adapting 

to changing technologies and attitudes on data 

acquisition and processing. The Geographical 

Information System (GIS) Processing Pilot Study is 

an example of this evolution as it uses currentgeneration tools to develop next-generation data.

Extracting Searchable Data from a Spatial 

Environment

The GIS Processing Pilot Study demonstrates the 

means of acquiring, managing, and delivering 

searchable safety data using spatial data. 

Traditionally, roadway variables are acquired in 

searchable data sets, subject to quality control, 

linked to crash and traffic volume data, and delivered 

through extract file data requests. The traditional 

data process is reliant upon the HSIS tabular road 

file. The new process will populate relevant roadway 

variables within a spatial environment. The pilot 

study seeks to create a searchable roadway data file 

from geospatial data.

What does this entail?

Traditionally, States have provided HSIS with tabular 

road log files, carrying a unique segment 

identification variable, per Figure 1. In States with a 

spatial road network, agencies created a route event 

layer, comparable to the unique segment 

identification variable. The route event layer was

stored as a feature class, populating a geodatabase. 

These were subjected to rigorous quality controls 

and made available to requestors as extract data 

sets for research. Many States are moving to spatial 

networks that will contain data previously 

disseminated in searchable data sets. HSIS 

identified efficiencies by developing critical lists of

attributes by State, extracting information from 

spatial files, and comparing it to existing roadway 

files.

How does it work?

HSIS has developed a means of replicating a 

searchable roadway file using spatial file attributes. 

Using the following steps, a searchable roadway file 

was created from North Carolina geospatial files.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 22

• Traditionally, with the HSIS Tabular Road Log 

File, the following are considered:

o Does file have a unique route or county 

identification variable?

 If not, then create a unique road or county 

identification variable.

 If so, then create a route event layer, which 

contains one linear referencing system 

segment per record in the HSIS tabular file.

o Does the data set contain linear referencing 

system (LRS) route features?

 If not, in the case of North Carolina, a step is 

added to convert road features to LRS 

routes.

 If so, move to route event layer creation.

• With Spatial Road Data, the following are 

considered:

o Does file have a unique route or county 

identification variable?

 If not, then create a unique road or county 

identification variable.

o If so, then proceed to comparison with the 

tabular road log with LRS route features.

o Do road log and extracted spatial data match?

 If not, then iteratively review the process.

 If so, then log record.

Specifically, data acquisition, data management, and 

data delivery underpin how this process works.

Data Acquisition

Currently, tabular road log and spatial data are 

acquired from participating HSIS states. These result 

in linked crash, roadway, and traffic volume data. 

Linked data describe homogenous sections of 

roadway inventory and crash data as part of the 

acquisition step. HSIS was able to develop longer 

homogenous sections based upon a list of critical 

attributes, thereby making the GIS Data Processing 

Pilot Study possible.

Data Management

Quality assurance and quality control are necessary 

steps, whether in the traditional or spatial environments. New QA/QC measures were established by 

including intra-year/inter-year checks as well as data 

synchronization.

Each year of spatial data must be checked to assure 

that coding is consistent over the crash years of interest. Data management includes not only making 

these checks but also synchronizing the data years 

and deriving variables based upon combinations of

variables. This process is needed to avoid internal 

inconsistencies that might be present in one or more

years. Synchronization is particularly important, as 

segments may have several underlying records, as 

seen in Figure 2.

Figure 1: General process for mapping HSIS road log data to spatial network.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 23

Data Delivery

Finally, data delivery involves the HSIS two-step 

process to ensure that the request is consistent with 

the research question. The two-step process begins 

with a prospective researcher posing a question to 

HSIS. HSIS vets questions to assure that the

requested data will address the research question. If 

the requested data are relevant to the research

question, then an extract data set will be issued,

closing the two-step process. Currently, the data are 

disseminated in Excel or SAS formats. In the future, 

the data can be made available in Excel, SAS, or 

GIS-readable formats, with specified crash counts 

attached to each roadway section. The goal is to 

adapt and apply this methodology to states that have 

moved to a GIS platform.

Pilot States

The pilot study used Ohio tabular roadway and GIS 

files to understand if relationships with tabular data 

can be readily converted to geospatial data for 

further analysis. The first iteration reviewed years 

2009 through 2012, finding no matches between the

traditional data and the spatial data. In order to better 

understand this issue, 2013 data were reviewed.

Crashes needed to be individually appended to 

spatial linear reference system. Not unexpectedly, 

over 200 spatial and tabular files, coding, and 

variable names did not match. A tool to convert 

linear referencing system locations to geolocation 

had to be used to overcome this issue. In order to

verify this methodology, North Carolina became the 

second pilot State.

The same methodology was applied to North 

Carolina for crashes occurring during the 1999 –

2004 period. In this exercise, the most recent spatial 

file was matched accurately to the 2014 roadway file.

Geographical Information System 

Processing Pilot Study: What’s next?

HSIS developed a methodology to extract relevant 

roadway data from GIS files in order both to streamline data extraction by avoiding redundancy, and 

also to explore potential cost savings in data

Figure 2: GIS processing, single linear reference system route, supported by eight underlying records.

Single LRS Route Eight HSIS LRS Segments

Eight HSIS Records
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 24

acquisition and cleaning. Ohio served as the pilot 

State for this exercise because of the high quality of

its GIS data and the availability of a roadway file. 

The pilot results support this methodology. 

States presenting the greatest geolocation 

challenges are leading candidates for future application of traditional data processing within the spatial 

environment using only spatial data from that State. 

States under consideration for future data set

creation based upon this format include California, 

Illinois, and Maine. For additional developments as 

HSIS moves from traditional to a big data platform, 

please see future issues of the Safety Compass. 

Topics will include creation of an EAR-supported big 

data surrogate for FHWA, and tool development

supporting the creation of synthetic data models. 

For more information on FHWA’s Geographical 

Information System Processing Pilot Study, please 

contact Ana Maria Eigen at ana.eigen@dot.gov.

NATIONAL CENTER FOR RURAL ROAD 

SAFETY BROADENS ACCESS TO SAFETY 

RESOURCES, TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE

By: Carla Little, National Center for Rural Road Safety

Looking back on its first year in operation, the 

accomplishments of the National Center for Rural 

Road Safety (Safety Center) include successfully 

standing up its core services and expanding access 

to critical road safety resources and training. Sponsored by FHWA, the Safety Center serves local, 

State and tribal road agencies that operate and 

manage rural roads. The Safety Center’s philosophy 

is to empower these agencies with the most effective 

safety tools and strategies that are currently available so they can improve safety, reduce injuries, and 

save lives. 

“To accomplish this vision, our short-term goals were 

to create a useful center, connect with potential 

users, and to begin to communicate effective 

methods and strategies for improving safety,” said 

Safety Center Director Steve Albert. “We’re proud to 

say that we achieved all three of these goals.” 

Albert points to a number of specific accomplishments that help to illustrate how the Safety Center is 

making a difference: 

• A Digital Gateway – The Safety Center website

(http://ruralsafetycenter.org/) is a centralized, 

easy-to-access resource that contains issue 

briefs, updates on noteworthy practices by other 

agencies, a repository of training resources and 

guidance documents, and a calendar of 

upcoming training and related events. Less than 

a year old, the website has had more than 

13,000 views by nearly 3000 visitors.

• Successful Monthly Webinars – The Safety 

Center has hosted four popular webinar training 

sessions with presentations by national experts 

on systemic safety, organizational culture, and 

rural signage. On average, more than 100 

attendees from around the country have 

participated in each event, and 119 attendees 

have received Continuing Education Units or 

Completion Certificates. The webinars are 

archived on the Safety Center website

(at: http://ruralsafetycenter.org/training-education/

safety-center-trainings/archived-safety-centertrainings/), so they are easily accessible on an 

ongoing basis.

• Original Videos – In order to offer customized, 

multimedia training options, the Safety Center is 

developing original training videos. In January, it 

released its first training video, “Introduction to 

Road Safety Culture,” available 

at: http://ruralsafetycenter.org/resources/multime

dia, which has already been viewed almost 150 

times. A second training video on road safety 

audits on tribal lands is currently under 

development.

• National Summit – The Safety Center 

spearheaded the development of the Moving 

Rural America Summit, a National working 

Summit on Transportation in Rural America that 

will be held in September 2016 in Denver, CO. 

The summit will bring together stakeholders from
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 25

• around the country and allow the Center and its 

partners to make a meaningful contribution to 

national transportation policy and initiatives. 

Registration for this summit is now open

at http://www.cvent.com/events/national-workingsummit-on-transportation-in-rural-america/eventsummary-c462978995ee4f9b9d9818cf0103

45e5.aspx.

• Technical Expertise and Assistance – The Safety 

Center team offers expertise and assistance on a 

broad range of safety issues. Over the last year, 

staff members have been invited to represent the 

Safety Center at nationally prominent safety and 

rural transportation forums sponsored by 

NHTSA, NADO, and the National Operations 

Center of Excellence.

• FHWA “Extension” - As an FHWA-sponsored 

program, an overarching goal for the Safety 

Center has been to support the development of 

rural safety resources and extend the reach of 

FHWA’s services. The Safety Center has 

broadened marketing efforts for FHWA’s existing 

toolkits and training, and it is currently in the 

process of updating and expanding FHWA’s 

Rural Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) 

Toolbox and the Road Safety 365 training for 

local government. These efforts, combined with 

outreach and training activities, make it possible 

for FHWA safety resources and assistance to 

reach more road agencies than ever before.

With a solid foundation of programs in place, the 

Safety Center is well positioned to continue and 

expand on its successful initiatives. For more 

information about current and upcoming programs 

and activities, visit the website 

at www.ruralsafetycenter.org

The National Center for Rural Road Safety is 

sponsored by the U.S. Department of Transportation 

Federal Highway Administration. It is managed by a 

team of transportation experts at the following 

entities: the Western Transportation Institute at 

Montana State University; the Center for Advanced 

Infrastructure and Transportation at Rutgers 

University; the Institute for Transportation at Iowa 

State University; Cambridge Systematics; IDT 

Group; and Bubar and Hall Consulting, LLC; in 

cooperation with the Local Technical Assistance 

Programs (LTAPs) of Iowa, Louisiana, Montana, and 

New Jersey.

ARKANSAS GRADUATES NEXT CLASS OF 

ROADS SCHOLARS

By: Laura D. Carter, Arkansas State Highway and 

Transportation Department 

The Arkansas Technology Transfer (T2) Program 

graduated 33 individuals from its 2015 ROADS 

Scholar Program. To obtain the ROADS Scholar 

status, each participant was required to complete a 

minimum of 24 hours of total coursework during a 4-

year period in the Safety or Maintenance & 

Infrastructure focus areas with a minimum of 10 

hours in the Maintenance & Infrastructure category. 

The new graduates were recognized during a 

luncheon at the County Judges Association of 

Arkansas’ 2015 Fall Conference.

The ROADS Scholar Program is designed to 

encourage the continuation and expansion of 

education in the transportation industry. This 

program provides a mechanism for professional 

development and recognition for personal growth

while delivering valuable knowledge and skills to 

local agency personnel responsible for the

construction and maintenance of roads and streets. 

Through a diverse selection of classes offered, each 

participant can choose to advance in both familiar 

and unfamiliar subjects relating to safety, 

maintenance, and infrastructure.

The Arkansas Technology Transfer Program, which 

provides ROADS Scholar training, is a cooperative 

effort of the Arkansas State Highway and 

Transportation Department, the FHWA Local 

Congratulations to the graduates of Arkansas’ ROADS 

Scholar Program!

Source: Arkansas State Highway and Transportation 

Department
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 26

Technical Assistance Program (LTAP), and the 

University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. For more 

information on the ROADS Scholar program, 

visit www.cttp.org/t2 or contact Laura D. Carter at 

(501) 569-2380.

ROADWAY SAFETY INFORMATION ON 

DEMAND IN THE PALM OF YOUR HAND

By: Victoria Beale, Director, Ohio LTAP Center

Remember the collection of laminated pocket guides 

in the glovebox of your work truck providing 

guidance on temporary workzones and installing 

roadside safety hardware? Those laminated guides 

will soon be a thing of the past, at least for the Ohio 

LTAP Center’s customers. Ohio LTAP has made 

available to its customers three new smartphone 

apps, replacing those expensive and quickly

outdated laminated pocket guides.

The Ohio LTAP Center staff 

felt very strongly that their 

customers, for the most part, 

are smartphone users and 

would benefit from apps 

providing the same 

information as the old, 

laminated pocket 

guides. The apps are 

offered free of charge 

through both the Apple 

App Store and the 

Android Store. In 

addition, the LTAP can 

update the information 

in the Apps easily via a 

download directly to the 

customer’s smartphone. 

This provides up-to-date information in a just-in-time 

delivery method—much quicker than republishing a 

laminated guide and mailing them out.

The center currently offers the following safetyfocused smartphone apps:

• Traffic Sign Installation Guide App – Access 

the most commonly used sections of the Ohio 

Manual for Uniform Traffic Control Devices

(OMUTCD) and the ODOT Traffic Engineering 

Manual concerning sign installation. The app 

includes guidance based on whether the sign is 

being installed in an urban or rural setting: sign 

orientation, mounting height, post length, lateral 

offset, and sign post reflector guidance.

• Roadside Safety Field Guide App – Quick and 

easy access to information on proper installation 

and maintenance of roadside safety hardware. 

Topics include: Guardrail basics, clear zone, 

roadside obstacles, barrier types, length of need, 

additional design considerations, terminals, crash 

cushions, and maintenance.

• ODOT Work Zone Pocket Guide App - This 

pocket guide summarizes specific guidelines 

established in the OMUTCD. It contains basic 

principles, a description of the standard traffic 

control devices used in work areas and traffic 

incident management areas, guidelines for the 

application of the devices, and typical application 

diagrams. Information concerning proper flagging 

is also presented.

To download any or all of the apps, please visit the 

Ohio LTAP Center’s website 

at: http://www.dot.state.oh.us/Divisions/Planning/Loc

alPrograms/LTAP/Pages/LTAP-Smart-PhoneApplications.aspx or search for the apps in the 

Apple App Store or the Android App store.

The apps have been very popular with the Ohio 

LTAP Center’s customers and were even featured 

during a session at the recent Transportation 

Research Board annual meeting in a session on 

Innovative Technology Transfer Methods, hosted by 

the TRB Standing Committee on Technology Transfer (ABG30). The session presentation included 

information on how the Ohio LTAP Center planned 

for and developed the smart phone apps using all 

internal center resources. 

The Ohio LTAP Center staff believes that 

smartphone apps are an important way to reach their 

customers. The roadway maintenance workers and 

engineers who care for Ohio roadways can benefit 

from having the information in the palm of their hand 

when needed.

In addition, the Ohio LTAP Center is open to sharing 

the app. If other public agencies—LTAP Centers and 

State DOTs—are looking to develop same or similar 

apps for their States, the LTAP is happy to share the 

code files for the Ohio apps with them as a 

foundation to create similar apps for their customers.

For more information on the apps or to request the 

source code files, please contact Victoria Beale with 

the Ohio LTAP Center at 614-466-3129 

or Victoria.beale@dot.ohio.gov.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 27

USING URBAN TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS TO 

MANAGE RURAL QUEUES

How Missouri Put a Proven Urban ITS 

Solution to Work on Rural Routes

By: K. Mark Sommerhauser, KC Scout ITS Project 

Manager

On any given commute within the Kansas City or St. 

Louis metro areas, motorists will see the everpresent dynamic message signs warning of traffic 

incidents, but also offering accurate drive time 

information. The system has become a mainstay for 

urban drivers as they travel along the roadways 

every day of the week.

For major construction projects, the Missouri 

Department of Transportation (MoDOT) has also

deployed several self-contained smart work zones 

that include portable changeable message signs 

warning of stopped traffic ahead when congestion 

builds on the approach to the work zone. These 

smart work zone systems have become a major tool 

that can help reduce crashes at the end of work zone 

queues.

MoDOT’s new Rural Queue and Delay Warning System builds upon these two proven tools to automatically format rural dynamic message signs with information that is crucial for motorists. The system, 

powered by TransCore’s TransSuite© Event Management system software,* leverages real-time probe 

segment speeds that are reported every minute of 

the day across the entire length of I-70 in Missouri.

The TransSuite© system analyzes the probe speeds 

and compares those numbers to thresholds for either 

slowed or stopped traffic. Once the low speed 

threshold has been met, the system automatically 

formats and posts a single phase DMS board 

message on the two boards preceding that incident 

or work zone. This automated message tells 

motorists if they should expect slowed or stopped 

traffic, where they should expect to encounter it, and 

how long of a delay should they expect because of it.

Once the traffic management center operator 

confirms the details of an incident, the TMC executes 

a response plan and posts the second phase of the

message board, which provides even more valuable 

information to the motorist.

The location where motorists should expect to 

encounter either slowed or stopped traffic is the most

critical piece of information, especially along rural 

interstate corridors where high-speed trucks traveling 

at 70 mph can suddenly encounter stopped traffic. 

This speed differential between high-speed interstate 

traffic and stopped, queued traffic often results in 

some of the most severe interstate accidents, which 

are often much worse than the initial incident that 

causes the slowed or stopped traffic in the first place.

The Rural Queue and Delay Warning System, a Best 

of ITS Heartland Project award winner, has been 

operational since January 2016 and, to date, traveler 

feedback on the system has been positive.

* The U.S. Government does not endorse products or 

manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers' names 

appear in this article only because they are considered 

essential to the objective of sharing information.

Example messages generated by the TransSuite©

system.
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 28

ANNOUNCEMENTS AND EVENTS

NHI Introduces New Human Factors in 

Roadway Design and Operations Training 

Course

The new “Human Factors in Roadway Design and 

Operations” training course (FHWA-NHI-380120) 

provides information and insights on how road users 

make decisions. Participants learn why it is

necessary to incorporate human factors in the design

and operation of roadways as a complement to

existing standards and manuals for roadway design 

and operation including AASHTO’s Policy on 

Geometric Design of Highways and Streets, Manual 

on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the 

Highway Safety Manual (HSM). The 2-day course 

also offers a review of specific guidelines, as well as 

scenario-based case studies that allow attendees to 

apply the “The Human Factors Guidelines for Road 

Systems” (HFG) to real roadway situations.

The primary audience for the HFG course includes:

• Engineers: State departments of transportation 

(DOT, metropolitan planning organizations 

(MPOs), counties, local municipalities, and 

consultants to the public agencies, including: 

o Safety engineers

o Traffic engineers

o Design engineers.

• Safety professionals (non-engineers): State 

DOTs, MPOs, counties, local municipalities, and 

consultants to public agencies.

Planners: State DOTs, MPOs, counties, local 

municipalities, and consultants to the public 

agencies.

Want to learn more? For more information, 

visit www.nhi.fhwa.dot.gov/default.aspx.

Host a session of this course in your local 

area!

NOTE: Class size is 20-30 attendees. If you think 

participation might be low for your State, consider 

inviting agencies from adjacent States. 

ICTTP2016 Profiles Latest in Global 

Action To Reduce Road Trauma

The program for the Sixth International Conference 

on Traffic and Transport Psychology (ICTTP2016) is

now released and showcases the latest international

research, programs, technological innovation and 

policy to save lives on Australian and global roads.

Over 70 countries are currently united in the UN 

Decade of Action and in accord with the conference 

theme “UN Decade of Action for Road Safety: The 

Half-way Point.”

ICTTP2016 will be held from August 2-5, 2016, in 

Brisbane, bringing international focus to Australia.

The 4-day scientific program of oral and poster 

presentations, symposia, and interactive panel 

sessions will provide an update on world-wide 

developments and will address: 

• Intelligent transport solutions

• Impaired driving

Registration Now Open for National Working Summit on Transportation in Rural 

America!

The National Center for Rural Road Safety, in partnership with the FHWA and numerous national partners, is 

coordinating Moving Rural America, a National Working Summit on Transportation in Rural America,

which will be held September 7 – 9, 2016 in Denver, Colorado. 

The summit will provide an opportunity for organizations and individuals from around the country to 

collaborate on enhancing the safety, efficiency, and sustainability of rural roads and transportation networks. 

In addition to traditional transportation organizations, the summit is inviting diverse stakeholders who 

recognize that an advanced rural transportation system is an essential component of prosperous rural 

communities and a vibrant national economy. In contrast to a traditional conference, the summit will 

encourage broad-based input from all participants, leading to the development of a white paper of 

recommendations. 

For more, visit the the Safety Center website at http://tinyurl.com/z24sh7h. To register, visit 

http://tinyurl.com/hbjltvt
Spring 2016: Volume 10 Issue 2 Safety Compass Newsletter • 29

• Road infrastructure and design

• Enforcement and behaviour

• Driver distraction and attention

• Road user attitudes and behaviour

• Vulnerable road users

• Driver training, assessment, and licensing

• Sustainable transport

• Road safety in the global perspective

• Road safety education and marketing

• Public and commercial transport

• Translating theory into action

ICTTP2016 is expected to attract over 300 delegates 

from more than 40 countries, including academics, 

researchers, policy-makers, practitioners and 

industry in the areas of public health, law, medicine, 

economics, law enforcement, public policy, 

education, human factors, and psychology. For 

further information and to register, 

visit www.icttp2016.com

The Safety Compass Newsletter

is a publication of the U.S. 

Department of Transportation, 

Federal Highway Administration.

The Federal Highway 

Administration publishes the Safety 

Compass newsletter three times a 

year. We can be reached at:

FHWA Office of Safety

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE

Room E71-320

Washington, DC 20590

The Safety Compass is available online at the FHWA Office of Safety 

website at: http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/newsletter/safetycompass/.

We welcome your comments and highway safety-related articles. The 

purpose of this newsletter is to increase highway safety awareness and 

information and to provide resources to help save lives.

We encourage readers to submit highway safety articles that might be of 

value to the highway safety community. Send your comments, questions 

and articles for review electronically to Tara McLoughlin at: 

tara.mcloughlin@dot.gov.