Utah 2007 Five Percent Report

This report is in response to the Federal requirement that each state describe at least 5 percent of its locations currently exhibiting the most severe highway safety needs, in accordance with Sections 148(c)(1)(D) and 148(g)(3)(A), of Title 23, United States Code. Each state's report is to include potential remedies to the hazardous locations identified; estimated costs of the remedies; and impediments to implementation of the remedies other than costs. The reports included on this web site represent a variety of methods utilized and various degrees of road coverage. Therefore, this report cannot be compared with the other reports included on this Web site.

Protection from Discovery and Admission into Evidence—Under 23 U.S.C. 148(g)(4) information collected or compiled for any purpose directly relating to this report shall not be subject to discovery or admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports.

Additional information, including the specific legislative requirements, can be found in the guidance provided by the Federal Highway Administration,
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/safetealu/fiveguidance.htm.

---

I. BACKGROUND

Section 1401 of SAFETEA-LU amended Section 148 of Title 23 USC to create a new Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP). The purpose of the HSIP is to reduce traffic fatalities and serious injuries on public roads. As part of the HSIP, States are required to submit an annual report describing 5 percent of their highway locations exhibiting the most severe safety needs [Section 148(c)(1)(D)]. The intent of this provision is to raise the public awareness of the highway safety needs and challenges in the States.

At the state level, Utah has adopted a Zero Fatalities goal (www.zerofatalities.com). Reaching this lofty goal, while difficult, is possible if everyone involved in traffic safety participates and contributes. Educating and partnering with the driving public is an essential step for the engineering community. This report is one avenue available for UDOT to strengthen that partnering effort.

II. DEVELOPMENT METHODOLOGY FOR THE STRATEGIC ACTION PLANS

Emphasis areas and strategies in the Utah Comprehensive Safety Plan (UCSP) were identified through an analysis of Utah crash data. This meets a requirement in SAFETEA-LU for crash data to be the basis prioritizing traffic safety needs in the state. The initial analysis was on the statewide, aggregate level so that problem crash types and trends could be identified. Once the emphasis areas were established the next step was to determine where the problems were occurring within the state in each category. This analysis was performed using the High Proportion Testing Method, a standard industry statistical method.

High Proportion Testing Method. A statistical review of Utah crash data was performed to identify priority road segments in each UCSP emphasis area. The review used the High Proportion Testing method to determine the locations. Generally, for each highway segment, the probability that the proportion of a specific crash type was higher than the average proportion for roads belonging to the same functional class (i.e. 2-lane highways) was computed based on the binomial test. If this probability was less than a certain significance level (i.e., 5%), the site was flagged and the number of specific crashes out of the total number of crashes at that site was reported. For example, a value of 8/10 would mean that there were eight crashes of that crash type out of a total of 10 crashes at that site, and that the proportion is substantially greater than what one would expect to occur strictly by chance. This screening method identifies highway segments that have a high proportion of a target collision (i.e. emphasis area) in relation to all collisions within a functional class, for serious and fatal injury crashes.

The High Proportion Testing Method is an effective way to evaluate crash history when sufficient traffic volume data is not available to facilitate the use of crash rates. The Department's current effort to improve our data collection, storage, and access practices will improve this situation, and should allow the use of safety performance functions for future analysis and prioritization (safety performance functions are based on crash rates, not crash frequency). An internal UDOT data warehouse that includes roadway data, features inventory, and crash data is in development.

Location Referencing Coverage by Jurisdiction. Our current crash analysis program requires that a route be location referenced for a crash to be assigned to a location along the route. Currently there is location referencing for state and federal aid routes only. The following table summarizes current levels of jurisdictional location referencing coverage:

Jurisdiction	Mileage	% Mileage	Location Referencing Coverage Mileage	Location Referencing Coverage    %
State	5,846	13.7 %	5,846	100.0 %
Local	32,852	76.9 %	7001	21.3 %
Other	4,006	9.4 %	0	0.0 %
Statewide	42,704	100.0 %	12,847	30.1 %

Note: Mileage totals from the UDOT 2005 Annual Statistical Summary
http://www.dot.utah.gov/download.php/tid=1023/2005Summary.pdf

III. PRIORITIZATION PROCESS

The network screening described above resulted in a list of roadway segments in each functional classification where the high proportion method indicated that roadway departure crashes were overrepresented. Roadway segmentation comes from the UDOT Roads File and is determined by the characteristics of the roadway. Each roadway segment has the same characteristics; traffic volume, functional classification, county boundary, urban/rural classification, etc. The segments vary in length from hundredths of a mile to several miles. The screening evaluated each segment individually, which generated a list of non-continuous portions of routes, each with a calculated probability for the number of roadway departure crashes that occurred. In this condition, the data was very difficult to analyze, and some data processing was necessary.

All segments with a calculated probability of 10% or less were aggregated to create the base list. A 5% threshold is often used for this type of analysis, but was increased to 10% to better identify trends and groupings of contiguous segments. However, as in the case of Roadway Departures, the screening resulted in a cumulative total of 1,810 centerline miles of roadway. Given current resource levels, it was necessary to narrow the list further. The lists by functional class were then combined and sorted by route and milepoint to align the segments. This practicality meant that changes in functional classification along a route were not considered separately.

With the list now limited to those with a 10% or less probability, and aligned by route and milepoint, continuous portions of routes could be identified. This step was somewhat subjective in that segments to be reviewed ideally would be several miles in length while still having a low overall probability.

IV. "5 Percent of Locations Exhibiting the Most Severe Safety Needs"

The established requirement for this report is for states to report the "5 percent of locations exhibiting the most severe safety needs." States have been given wide latitude to determine what that means. The emphasis areas in the Utah Comprehensive Safety Plan lend themselves to a segmental analysis, which was selected as the method used for the Utah report. Due to the variability in the locations of severe crashes, the highway segments showing the most severe safety needs will likely change each year. Therefore it is more appropriate to focus on those segments that were identified in the initial data analysis and monitor the effectiveness of the mitigation measures implemented. A new emphasis area has been added since the 2007 report. Drowsy Driving has been identified as a significant cause of crashes in the state. The statistical screening and subsequent sorting resulted in the following priority road mileages by emphasis area:

• Roadway Departure Crashes: 1,087 miles
• Safety Restraint Use: 233 miles
• Impaired Driving: 385 miles
• Aggressive Driving: 365 miles
• Drowsy Driving: 162 miles

The sum of the above reported mileage is 2,232 (includes some double counting). Only the Strategic Action Plan (SAP) for Roadway Departure Crashes has been developed in sufficient detail to identify individual locations as the "5 percent most severe." Reported segments for the other three areas represent the raw data that will be analyzed in the preparation of those SAPs.

Emphasis Area: Roadway Departure Crashes. Roadway departure crashes account for about 50% of the fatalities on Utah's highways. The first priority for Roadway Departure crashes is the interstate. This is due to the high speeds, increased traffic volume, high truck volume, and increased incidence of fatigued driving that occur on our mostly rural interstate system in Utah. The following is a list of the high priority roadways analyzed for this emphasis area:

Roadway Departure Crashes - Priority Roadway Segments

Route	Begin MP	End MP	Mileage
6	0	88	88
6	160	223	63
6	248	300	52
12	16	58	42
12	93	123	30
14	7	41	34
15	80	120	40
15	188	223	35
20	0	21	21
21	57	90	33
30	99	107	8
30	120	132	12
40	20	50	30
40	115	140	25
50	32	49	17
59	0	17	17
70	17	48	31
70	94	159	65
70	193	215	22
80	0	98	98
80	163	194	31
89	0	103	103
91	2	19	17
130	19	36	17
138	12	21	9
143	4	31	27
189	8	26	18
191	87	111	24
191	131	157	26
191	157	177	20
262	0	23	23
262	31	40	9
Emphasis area total:			1,087

Of the segments listed above, the most severe segments are:

Roadway Departure Crashes: "5% Most Severe Safety Needs"

Route	Begin	End	Mileage	Potential Remedy	Estimated/Actual Cost	Comments
6	mp 160 Spanish Fork	mp 223 Scofield	63	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$500,000	Safety Assessment performed FY 07
15	mp 188 Scipio	mp 223 Nephi	35	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$300,000	Safety Assessment performed FY 07
15	mp 80 Parowan	mp 120 Beaver	40	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$400,000	Safety Assessment performed FY 07
40	mp 20 Heber	mp 50 Straw-berry	30	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$300,000	Safety Assessment performed FY 07
70	mp 17 Belknap	mp 48 Richfield	31	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$100,000	Rumble Strips & Signing installed FY 06
70	mp 94 SR 10	mp 159 Green River	65	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$500,000	Rumble Strips & Signing installed FY 06
70	mp 193	mp 215 Cisco	22	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$100,000	Rumble Strips & Signing installed FY 06
80	mp 163 Echo	mp 215 WY stateline	52	Rumble Strips, Signing, Education	$500,000	Safety Assessment performed FY 07
Total			360		$2,800,000
Emphasis Area Total			1,087
% Reported			33%

Several segments have been added since last years report. These new segments are the next "most severe safety concerns" for ROR crashes in the State. There are no significant impediments effecting the implementation of these projects. The segments where mitigation measures have been installed will be studied once sufficient data is available in the coming years.

In addition to the segments listed, safety assessments are being performed on about 500 miles of other highway segments around the State. These assessments will identify safety deficiencies and make recommendations to remedy those deficiencies.

Emphasis Area: Safety Restraint Use. Prioritization within this emphasis area will occur during SAP development. Until that occurs it is impossible to say which segments are the most severe in terms of safety needs. The following is the complete listing of priority segments identified in the screening:

Safety Restraint Use: Priority Segments

Route	Begin MP	End MP	Mileage	Potential Remedy (general)	Estimated Cost	Comments
18	2	4	2	Enforcement campaigns; Education campaigns.	$500,000	“Click it or Ticket” program has been successful.  Since 1999, safety restraint use has increased from 67% to 87%.
34	0	2	2
70	130	228	98
80	0	100	100
89	288	308	20
91	23	29	6
171	3	8	5
		Total	233		$500,000
Emphasis Area Total			233
% Reported			100%

Utah's law enforcement community joined with thousands of other state and local agencies across the nation to launch an aggressive national Click It or Ticket mobilization to save lives by cracking down on safety belt law violators. A total of 86 law enforcement agencies across the state participated in the high visibility mobilization working 5,286 overtime hours and issuing 5,571 seat belt and 307 child restraint citations.

Emphasis Area: Impaired Driving. As with the Safety Restraint Use, prioritization within this emphasis area will occur during SAP development. Until that occurs it is impossible to say which segments are the most severe in terms of safety needs. The following page shows the complete listing of priority segments identified in the screening:

Impaired Driving: Priority Segments

Route	Begin MP	End MP	Mileage	Potential Remedy (general)	Estimated Cost	Comments
15	0	7	7	Enforcement campaigns; Education campaigns; Signing.	$500,000	The Utah Highway Safety Office has implemented programs to reduce impaired drivers.  For example the EASY program has targeted under age drinking.  Other programs will be specified in the SAP.
15	82	95	13
15	146	166	20
15	187	223	36
15	269	284	15
70	25	57	32
70	122	232	110
80	0	100	100
91	17	25	8
191	114	158	44
Total			385		$500,000
Emphasis Area Total			385
% Reported			100%

The most significant impediment to implementing the SAP may be limited resources in law enforcement to apply to new enforcement campaigns.

Emphasis Area: Aggressive Driving. Prioritization within this emphasis area will occur during SAP development. Until that occurs it is impossible to say which segments are the most severe in terms of safety needs. The following is the complete listing of priority segments identified in the screening:

Aggressive Driving: Priority Segments

Route	Begin MP	End MP	Mileage	Potential Remedy (general)	Estimated Cost	Comments
15	286	360	74	Enforcement campaigns; Education campaigns; Signing.	$500,000	Utah has developed a Aggressive Driving Strategic Action Plan.  Included in this SAP is a Speed Management Plan.
18	1	4	3
34	0	2	2
39	4	14	10
40	0	19	19
48	9	12	3
70	6	18	12
70	63	86	23
71	10	15	5
73	39	42	3
75	0	2	2
77	4	9	5
80	111	166	55
80	184	194	10
84	51	56	5
84	67	74	7
89	312	321	9
89	345	356	11
91	10	17	7
108	1	8	7
154	4	24	20
173	5	10	5
180	0	2	2
189	1	19	18
190	2	15	13
201	9	18	9
203	0	6	6
210	3	12	9
215	5	11	6
266	0	5	5
Total			365		$500,000
Emphasis Area Total			365
% Reported			100%

Like most other emphasis areas, the most significant impediment to implementing the SAP may be limited resources in law enforcement to apply to new enforcement campaigns. A restriction on electronic speed enforcement in Utah also limits available mitigation measures for speeding and red light running.

Emphasis Area: Drowsy Driving

The drowsy driving emphasis area has been added since the 2007 report. Drowsy driving has been identified as a significant cause to severe crashes in Utah. The following are priority roadway segments for drowsy driving based on crash data analyses.

Drowsy Driving: Priority Segments

Route	Begin	End	Mileage	Potential Remedy	Estimated Cost
15	mp 0 Arizona SL	mp 5 St. George	5	Shoulder Rumble Strips, & Median Cable Barrier	$650,000
15	mp 340 I-84	mp 345 North Ogden	5	Shoulder Rumble Strips, & Median Cable Barrier	$650,000
70	mp 20 Indian Museum	mp 25 Joseph	5	Median Cable Barrier & Signing	$600,000
70	mp 95 Emery Co.	mp 100	5	Median Cable Barrier & Signing	$600,000
80	mp 5 Nevada	mp 75 Stansbury Mountains	70	Rumble Strips, Median Cable Barrier, Signing & Education	$4,000,000
Emphasis Area Total			90		$6,500,000

The segment on I-80 is a long straight stretch of freeway where there are frequent drowsy drivers going to and from Nevada.

Surveys taken at rest areas along I-15, I-70 & I-80 have indicated some effectiveness of signs and other countermeasures.

Note that some of the other locations such as I-15 from Scipio to Nephi (mp 188 to 223) are listed in the Road Departure section as well as this section for Drowsy Driving. This raises the obvious fact that improvements in driver behavior as well as engineering improvements are both critical mitigation measures. Educating drivers of the dangers of drowsy driving is a critical task in these efforts.

VI. CONTACT INFORMATION

Questions regarding this report should be directed to:

Michael Kaczorowski, P.E.
Safety Programs Engineer
Traffic and Safety Division
Utah Department of Transportation
4501 S 2700 W
Box 143200
Salt Lake City, UT 84114-3200
(801) 964-4521
mkaczorowski@utah.gov