MARYLAN STRATEGIC HIGHWAY Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Table of Contents Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................................... ES-1 Introduction and Background ................................................................................................................................ 1 2003 Strategic Highway Safety Plan ................................................................................................................... 1 2006 Strategic Highway Safety Plan ................................................................................................................... 1 The SHSP Update Process ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Zero Fatalities ......................................................................................................................................................... 4 Statewide Fatality Goal .................................................................................................................................... 4 Statewide Injury Goal ....................................................................................................................................... 5 Update Approach .................................................................................................................................................. 6 Emphasis Area: Distracted Driving ...................................................................................................................... 8 Emphasis Area: Impaired Driving ...................................................................................................................... 10 Emphasis Area: Aggressive Driving ................................................................................................................. 12 Emphasis Area: Occupant Protection ................................................................................................................. 14 Emphasis Area: Highway Infrastructure .............................................................................................................. 16 Emphasis Area: Pedestrian Crashes ................................................................................................................... 18 Implementation ...................................................................................................................................................... 20 Appendix ................................................................................................................................................................. 21 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan Implementation Team ............................................................... 21 i Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Table of Figures Figure 1. Statewide Motor Vehicles Crashes, 2005 to 2009 ....................................................................................... 2 Figure 2. Statewide Motor Vehicle Fatalities, 2005 to 2009 ....................................................................................... 2 Figure 3. Statewide Motor Vehicle Injuries, 2005 to 2009.......................................................................................... 3 Figure 4. Statewide Motor Vehicle Serious Injuries, 2005 to 2009 ........................................................................... 3 Figure 5. Maryland Fatality Goals through 2015 ....................................................................................................... 5 Figure 6. Maryland Injury Goals through 2015 .......................................................................................................... 5 Figure 7. SHSP Update Matrix ...................................................................................................................................... 6 Figure 8. Distracted Driving Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009 ........................................................................... 8 Figure 9. Distracted Driving Fatality Objectives through 2015 ............................................................................... 9 Figure 10. Distracted Driving Injury Objectives through 2015 .................................................................................. 9 Figure 11. Impaired Driving Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009.......................................................................... 10 Figure 12. Impaired Driving Fatality Objectives through 2015 ............................................................................... 11 Figure 13. Impaired Driving Injury Objectives through 2015.................................................................................. 11 Figure 14. Aggressive Driving Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009........................................................................ 12 Figure 15. Aggressive Driving Fatality Objectives through 2015............................................................................ 13 Figure 16. Aggressive Driving Injury Objectives through 2015 .............................................................................. 13 Figure 17. Occupant Protection Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009 ...................................................................... 14 Figure 18. Occupant Protection Fatality Objectives through 2015 .......................................................................... 15 Figure 19. Occupant Protection Injury Objectives through 2015 ............................................................................ 15 Figure 20. Highway Infrastructure-Related Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009 ................................................. 16 Figure 21. Highway Infrastructure Fatality Objectives through 2015 .................................................................... 17 Figure 22. Highway Infrastructure Injury Objectives through 2015 ...................................................................... 17 Figure 23. Pedestrian Fatalities and Injuries, 2005 to 2009 ........................................................................................ 18 Figure 24. Pedestrian Fatality Objectives through 2015 ............................................................................................ 19 Figure 25. Pedestrian Injury Objectives through 2015 .............................................................................................. 19 iii Ma aryland Strategic Highway Safet Plan c ty 2011-2015 Exe ecutiv Sum ry ve mma In the pas 10 years, Ma st aryland has de eveloped two Strategic High hway Safety P Plans (SHSP). The first Mar ryland SHSP, mo odeled after the American Association o State Trans t of sportation Off ficials (AASH HTO) national plan, l focused o the State's challenges in 2 program ar on c 23 reas and inclu uded multiple strategies to r reduce fatalitie and es serious in njuries on Mary yland's roadw ways. In 2006, M Maryland upd dated the SH based on the process r HSP recommended by the 2005 Safe, Accoun d ntable, Flexible, a Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFET and T n TEA-LU). The update follow a e wed data-drive multidisci en, iplinary appr roach involvin the 4 Es o highway s ng of safety - engin neering, educ cation, enforceme and emer ent, rgency medic services. T result was a statewide, comprehensi safety plan that cal The s , ive n provided a coordinated framework for reducing fatalities and serious injuri on all publ roads. The 2006 d ies lic e SHSP est tablished state ewide goals, objectives, an 14 key em nd mphasis areas developed in consultation with n n Federal, s state, local, and private secto safety stake d or eholders. Despite in ncreases in vehicle miles t v traveled, repo orted traffic c crashes declin in Maryla ned and, dropping to a g historic lo of 96,392 in 2009. Betw ow i ween 2005 and 2009, the nu d umber of fata alities decrease by 10.4 pe ed ercent, overall in njuries decreased by 14.4 p percent, and s serious injurie declined by 39.9 percent To continu this es y t. ue positive t trend, Maryla and updated the SHSP in 2010 under t direction of the SHSP Managemen and the P nt Implemen ntation Teams s. Maryland joined AASH d HTO, other na ational organiz zations and several ot ther states in adopting a To a oward Zero Dea fatality aths goal to reduce motor ve ehicle-related fatalities and injuries by one-half b 2030. To monitor pro by ogress toward this goal, d Maryland approved in d nterim fatality targets for the life of the e SHSP, re epresenting an average a a annual decrea ase of 3.1 percent. Each emph hasis area als adopted m so measurable fatality an injury objec nd ctives in line w these goa with als. o The D Distracted Dri iving Emphas Area Team identified sis m the ne to evaluat and recomm eed te mend legislati and/or ion regul lations that lim the use of electronic dev mit vices while drivin increase reporting of d ng, r distracted driv ving incidents across multi s iple discipline and condu an es; uct educa ation campaig to educate t public. gn the o The I Impaired Driv ving Emphasis Area Team r s recommended an increase e d enforcement o alcohol and drug of d impairment laws; enhancement of the prosecu e ution and adju udication of alc cohol and dru impaired dr ug riving cases; and public awareness init ; a tiatives, includ ding education and media programs. A n Additional stra ategies includ impleme ded entation of pr rograms to re educe undera drinking a age and driving, and integrati ion of Drivi Under Inf ing fluence (DUI) data to ensur offender in re nformation is available to ju udges, prosec cutors, and p probation and parole. o To re educe aggress sive driving a and speeding the Aggress g, sive Driving E Emphasis Area Team proposed strate egies to ident tify the beha aviors, target audiences, a and corridors where aggre essive driving and g speed ding is a prob blem; a contin nuation of the regional Smooth Operator c campaign; and developmen and d nt imple ementation of a year round aggressive dr d riving campai ign. They also recommend implemen o ded nting a statew wide enforcem ment strategy on aggressiv driving, an the identi y ve nd ification of eff fective engine eering soluti ions to addres the problem ss m. o The O Occupant Prot tection Empha Area Tea recommen asis am nded four strat tegies to achie their objec eve ctives, includ ding an expan nsion of Click It or Ticket and the Law E k Enforcement C Challenge pro ograms; year r round night ttime seatbelt enforcement and education program; and an incre ease in the co orrect use of child ES-1 Maryland S Strategic Highw Safety Plan way 2011-2015 passe enger safety devices for inf d fants, children and pre-dri n, ivers. They a also recomme ended legislati or ion regul lations that wo ould require th use of safet devices in a seating posi he ty all itions. o The Highway Inf frastructure E Emphasis Are Team ide ea entified three strategies to accomplish their o measurable objecti ives, including a corridor p g program that would target safety improv vements whe the ere sever index is hi rity igh; identification of high cr rash locations and impleme s entation of saf fety improvem ments; and identification of system wide improv n vements to reduce the s severity of i intersection-re elated, const truction zone and run-off-th road crashes. a he o The P Pedestrian Em mphasis Area Team iden a ntified four st trategies, includ ding the deve elopment of m model process to identify and prioritiz high-inciden locations a ze nt and system w wide pedestria safety an issues the develop s; pment and ev valuation of m model approa aches for built environments that accomm s modate safe p pedestrian tra avel; and the d development and evaluation of model ap a n pproaches to improve pedes strian and mo otorist awaren ness and beha avior. The te eam also recom mmended cre eating partner rships among state, region and g nal, local stakeholders to develop action plans that addres highs s ss priori locations and system wide issues u ity using compre ehensive appro oaches to pede estrian safety. Implemen ntation of the 2011-2015 SH will invol the collabo HSP lve orative work o professiona representin the of als ng discipline of transport es tation plannin engineering and operatio public ou ng, g ons, utreach and ed ducation, legis slation and law e enforcement, and emergenc medical ser a cy rvice systems. Each of thes disciplines h a critical r se has role to play in de efining the opt timal combina ation of counte ermeasures th will yield th best traffic safety outcom hat he mes. This revis SHSP also takes a new approach by focusing not o sed o only the issue that cause th greatest nu es he umber of traffic s safety problem but on geo ms, ographic area where traffi crashes are most prevale as ic ent. Each Emp phasis Area Team will focus on areas whe their issue is most con ere e ncentrated. In addition, the Teams will work n e together t focus on hig to gh-priority cor rridors to com mbat the combi ination of issu present at t ues these locations s. A wide ra ange of stakeh holder groups will be involv in the succ ved cessful implem mentation of th SHSP, inclu he uding state agen ncies and nong governmental organizations regional aut l s, thorities, local agencies, com l mmunity organizat tion and the pu ublic. ES-2 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Introduction and Background 2003 Strategic Highway Safety Plan In 1997, AASHTO published the national SHSP to save lives on the nation's roadways through implementation of strategies that target specific highway safety problems. AASHTO issued a challenge to states to develop their own SHSPs and Maryland was one of the states that answered the call. The early Maryland SHSP, modeled after the national plan, focused on the State's problems in 23 program areas, and included multiple strategies to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on Maryland's roadways. 2006 Strategic Highway Safety Plan In 2006, Maryland updated the SHSP based on the process recommended by SAFETEA-LU. The update followed a data driven, multidisciplinary approach involving the 4 Es of safety - engineering, education, enforcement, and emergency medical services. The result was a statewide, comprehensive safety plan that provided a coordinated framework for reducing fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. The 2006 SHSP established statewide goals, objectives, and key emphasis areas developed in consultation with Federal, state, local, and private sector safety stakeholders. These emphasis areas included the following: o o Impaired Driving; o Information and Decision Support Systems; - Distracted Driving; o Hazardous Locations: - Older Drivers; - Keep Vehicles on the Roadway; - Young Drivers; - Intersections; - Motorcycles; and - Work Zones; and - Truck and Bus. - Pedestrians. o Aggressive Driving; and Occupant Protection; o Emergency Medical Response. o Driver Competency: Implementation of the 2006 SHSP began immediately after approval by the Governor. SHSP Implementation Emphasis Area Teams worked on implementing strategies and action steps through statewide programs and activities. Regional teams, established at the 2007 Leadership Summit, implemented programs at the local level. Despite increases in vehicle miles traveled, traffic crashes declined in Maryland dropping to a historic low of 96,392 in 2009. Between 2005 and 2009, the number of fatalities decreased by 10.4 percent, overall injuries decreased by 14.4 percent, and serious injuries declined by 39.9 percent. The number of crashes and fatalities are shown in Figures 1 and 2 and Figures 3 and 4 show the number of injuries and serious injuries. 1 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 1. Statewide Motor Vehicles Crashes 2005 to 2009 Total Crashes 104,000 102,608 102,000 101,890 100,947 100,000 98,000 96,392 95,355 96,000 94,000 92,000 90,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Year Figure 2. Statewide Motor Vehicle Fatalities 2005 to 2009 Persons Killed 660 651 640 620 615 614 592 600 580 560 550 540 520 500 480 2005 2006 2007 Year 2 2008 2009 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 3. Statewide Motor Vehicle Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured 56,000 55,287 53,617 54,000 51,730 52,000 50,000 48,149 48,000 47,330 46,000 44,000 42,000 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 4,544 4,383 2008 2009 Year Figure 4. Statewide Motor Vehicle Serious Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Seriously Injured 8,000 7,287 7,000 6,246 6,000 5,393 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 2005 2006 2007 Year 3 Maryland S Strategic Highw Safety Plan way 2011-2015 The SHS Up e Proc e SP pdate cess In 2010, M Maryland mov forward o an update of the ved on SHSP to a accomplish sev veral importan goals: nt o Enhan collaborat nce tion across pu ublic sector age encies and p private sector organizations; o ; o Narro the focus of the SHS to the are of ow s SP eas greate need and potential for s est p success as iden ntified throu a detailed data analysis process; ugh o Use s science-based research appr roaches to quantify the effectiveness of both engineering and behav vioral safety co ountermeasur res; o Foste collaboratio among st er on takeholders a the at state, regional, and local levels; a d and o Focus on counterm s measure evalua ation. Members of the Maryl s land SHSP Im mplementation Team, whic include rep n ch presentatives f from the 2006 plan 6 emphasis area teams, the regional implementatio teams, Fed s t on deral agencies and SHA, o s, oversaw the u update process. A complete list of Impleme entation Team members ap m ppears in the A Appendix. The Implementation Team determin the updat plan wou focus on al road users: drivers, bicy T ned ted uld ll yclists, motorcyc riders, and pedestrians. The term "r cle d . road user" pu a more hu uts umane face to the problem and o m relates the problems to the individuals who use th roadways. e o he Zero F Fatalities Maryland joined other states and or d r rganizations in adopting th goal of the national ini he e itiative Towa ard Zero Dea aths: A Nation Strategy o Highway S nal on Safety, to red duce traffic fat talities by half by 2030. Maryland supports the long-term go of zero dea d e oal aths and is committed to ad dopting strate egies to achiev that ve purpose. To establish a benchmark for progress f the SHSP, Maryland ap for pproved interi goals for fa im atality and injury reduction by 2015. y y To establi a goal for the SHSP in-li with the lo ish t ine ong-range goa to reduce fat al talities by 50 p percent (592 in 2008 n to 296 in 2030), the National Stud Center for Trauma and Emergency Medical Systems (NSC) a the n N dy d at University of Maryland School of Me y d edicine applie a reduction of 3.1 percen to each calen ed n nt ndar year for s subsequent esti imates. The NSC calculated this percenta as the geo N d age ometric mean reduction ove the entire 22 er 2-year period. T methodolo set fatality goals for eac emphasis ar This ogy y ch rea. To set goa for reducin total injurie the NSC used the most re als ng es, ecent eight yea of Marylan traffic crash data ars nd h to calculate the annual ratio of fatalities to total inju uries (0.011), a applied th ratio to the 2030 fatality g to and he goal determine the expected number of in e d njuries. The re esulting injury total indicate a 44 percen decrease fro the y ed nt om 2008 num mber, which co orresponds to a annual red an duction of 2.6 p percent. The N used the same method NSC dology used for f fatality calcula ations to determ the estim mine mations for a 2 2015 goal. Statewide Fatality Goal Reduce th annual num he mber of traffic-related fatalit on all road in Marylan from 592 in 2008 to fewer than ties ds nd n 475 by De ecember 31, 20 (19.8 perce reduction). 015 ent 4 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Statewide Injury Goal Reduce the annual number of traffic-related injuries on all roads in Maryland from 48,149 in 2008 to fewer than 40,032 (16.8 percent reduction) by December 31, 2015. Figures 5 and 6 show interim goals fatality and injury goals through 2015. Figure 5. Maryland Fatality Goals through 2015 Fatalities 560 539 540 522 520 506 500 490 480 475 460 440 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 6. Maryland Injury Goals through 2015 Injuries 45,000 44,485 44,000 43,328 43,000 42,202 42,000 41,104 41,000 40,032 40,000 39,000 38,000 37,000 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year 5 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Updated Approach In updating the SHSP, a key consideration was to make the plan strategic rather than comprehensive. The prior SHSPs developed by Maryland covered a broad range of emphasis areas. This broad focus resulted in plans that were more comprehensive in nature touching on virtually every traffic safety issue. The 2003 plan included 22 emphasis areas reduced to 14 in the 2006 version. The SHSP Implementation Team decided to reduce the number of emphasis areas in the 2011-2015 plan to six: o Reduce Distracted Driving; o Increase Occupant Protection Use; o Reduce Impaired Driving; o Reduce Highway Infrastructure Crashes; and o Reduce Aggressive Driving; o Improve Pedestrian Safety. A planning matrix was developed to guide the selection of strategies and action steps. Figure 7 shows the updated plan emphasis areas, the target groups each emphasis area team considered, and the countermeasure tools available from the 4 Es of safety. The matrix illustrates how data collection and analysis are used both to identify critical emphasis areas and to select appropriate countermeasures in the areas of EMS, outreach and education, enforcement and engineering. Quality data analysis is crucial for emphasis area teams to properly identify target groups, adapt and refine countermeasures, and to evaluate the effectiveness of implemented strategies. Figure 7. SHSP Update Matrix Target Group High Risk 21-34 Motorcyclists Trucks/ Buses Collaboration Young Drivers Coordination Emphasis Area Older Drivers Distracted Driving Impaired Driving Aggressive Driving Communication Occupant Protection Communication Highway Infrastructure Related Pedestrians Data EMS Public Outreach Communications Education Laws & Law Enforcement Countermeasure Tools 6 Highway Planning, Design, and Engineering Ma aryland Strategic Highway Safet Plan c ty 2011-2015 Througho the update process and later during i out e implementatio teams wer urged to com on, re mmunicate, co oordinate, and collaborate am mong themse elves and the v various safety stakeholders who will brin the SHSP t life. y s ng to Volunteer stepped for rs rward to assu ume leadersh of the revi hip ised emphasis areas and o s others agreed to be responsib for each of the plan's st ble f trategies and a action steps. In selecting t appropriat strategies for the the te plan, the t teams did the following: o Revie ewed strategie in the curren SHSP; es nt o Revie ewed the rese earch to dete ermine effectiv counterme ve easures from each o the 4 Es of Engineering, E of E Enforcement, E Education and EMS; and d o Revie ewed the data to determine areas of focus (target groups, locations, a e etc.). The teams reviewed cu s urrent SHSP st trategies to determine wheth they shou be carried o her uld over to the up pdated plan, incl luding the Cli It or Ticket Checkpoint S ick t, Strikeforce, and Smooth Oper d rator enforcem ment and educ cation campaign The team also examin the Natio ns. ms ned onal Cooperative Highway Research Pr y rogram's (NC CHRP) Report 500 series on effective cou untermeasure the National Highway Traffic Safe Administ es, y ety tration (NHTSA) publication, Countermeasu ) ures That Work, and the N NCHRP Repor 622, Effectiv rt veness of Beha avioral Highway S Safety Counter rmeasures. Sinc the plan's e ce emphasis area were limite to six, each team also car as ed refully reviewed the statistics on the nature and extent of the problem a o among various target group including: s ps, o o o o o Young Driv (16 to 20 y vers years old); High-Risk D Drivers (21 to 3 years old); 34 Motorcyclis sts; Truck and B Drivers; an Bus nd Older Drive (65+). ers This data review a helped th teams deter also he rmine the nee for any stra ed ategies or ac ction steps aim at these target groups For instanc according to the med s. ce, data, high h-risk drivers (21 to 34 year account for a significant percentage of traffic crashe and consequ rs) r f es uently are respon nsible for larg proportion of traffic deat and injurie Pedestrian were origin ge ths es. ns nally a target g group, but a rev view of the data revealed that 20 perce of all fatal ent lities in Mary yland involve pedestrians and a decision w made to make pedestria a specific e was m ans emphasis area in the plan. a In additio to target gr on roup analysis, the teams also reviewed th data to dete he ermine if there were certain areas e n of the Sta certain tim of the da or times of the year wh crashes, fa ate, mes ay, f hen atalities, and injuries were more prevalent This compr t. rehensive data analysis ena a abled teams to pinpoint pro o oblems and d develop appro opriate solutions. Finally, the emphasis area teams applie a test to eac strategy to d . a ed ch determine the following: e o Is the strategy feas e sible in terms of the time it will take to g it accompl get lished and the amount of m e money and r resources that are required f implement for tation? o Does the strategy require legisla r ative approval and if yes, d l, does that elimi inate this strat tegy as a poss sibility in the plan? e o Does the strategy have support f h from at least o key safety stakeholder? one Once the strategies we complete, the teams dev ere veloped the a action steps to implement e o each strategy along with the output and outcome measures to determ mine success. Output mea asures, which are quantitat tive in nature, w provide th emphasis a will he area teams wit information on specific a th n activities, such as the num h mber of citations g given during a high visibilit enforcemen initiative. O ty nt Outcome meas sures are qual litative and pr rovide teams wit information on whether c th n completion of the action ste resulted in a positive imp f ep pact. The 2011 1-2015 SHSP focu uses on count termeasures th are effectiv through re hat ve esearch and im mplementation in the field. They n will be co oordinated acr ross different emphasis are within the framework of the 4 Es of safety, which will eas e f foster gre eater collabora ation, commun nication, and c coordination a state, region and local l at nal, levels that wil lead ll to effectiv implementa ve ation of the SH HSP. 7 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Distracted Driving A distracted driving crash occurs when the driver(s) fails to observe due diligence on the road. The cause for shifting attention away from the task can be anything - adjusting a radio, attending to a child, thinking about day-to-day worries, or using a cell phone. In Maryland, a distracted driving crash is defined as at least one driver in the crash either failing to pay full-time attention or using a cell phone. Figure 8 shows the number of distracted driving fatalities and injuries from 2005 to 2009. Figure 8. Distracted Driving Fatalities and Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured Persons Killed 40,000 400 35,000 350 30,000 300 25,000 250 20,000 200 15,000 150 10,000 100 5,000 50 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 37,075 35,830 34,225 31,778 30,152 Fatalities 346 317 284 290 252 Distracted Driving Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of distracted driving-related fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 290 in 2008 to fewer than 233 by December 31, 2015 (19.8 percent reduction). Distracted Driving Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of distracted driving-related injuries on all roads in Maryland from 31,778 in 2008 to fewer than 26,426 by December 31, 2015 (16.8 percent reduction). Figures 9 and 10 show the performance measures for distracted driving fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 8 0 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 9. Distracted Driving Fatality Objectives through 2015 Fatalities 270 264 265 260 256 255 248 250 245 240 240 235 233 230 225 220 215 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 10. Distracted Driving Injury Objectives through 2015 Injuries 30,000 29,363 29,500 29,000 28,600 28,500 27,856 28,000 27,500 27,132 27,000 26,500 26,426 26,000 25,500 25,000 24,500 2011 2012 2013 Year 2014 2015 To accomplish these objectives, the Distracted Driving Emphasis Area Team identified three strategies: o Evaluate and recommend legislation and /or regulations that limit the use of electronic devices while driving; o Improve reporting of distracted driving incidents across multiple disciplines, i.e., citation and crash reports from law enforcement, surveys from the RTSP's, information from EMS personnel, etc.; and o Conduct an education campaign on distracted driving prevention. 9 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Impaired Driving According to NHTSA, drivers are considered to be alcohol-impaired when their blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is .08 grams per deciliter (g/dL) or higher. Thus, any fatality occurring in a crash involving a driver with a BAC of .08 or higher is considered to be an alcohol-impaired-driving fatality. The term "driver" refers to the operator of any motor vehicle, including a motorcycle. Maryland Code (Transportation Article Section 21-902) defines driving while under the influence of drugs and alcohol as "driving while under the influence of alcohol, while under the influence of alcohol per se, while impaired by alcohol, or while impaired by a drug, a combination of drugs, a combination of one or more drugs and alcohol, or while impaired by a controlled dangerous substance." Alcohol related fatalities shown herein are provided by NHTSA's FARS. All other crash, injury, and fatality data are taken from crash reports submitted by law enforcement agencies throughout the state. Figure 11 shows the fatalities and injuries related to impaired driving (BAC 0.08+) crashes. Figure 11. Impaired Driving Fatalities and Injuries: 2005-2009 Persons Injured 5,200 Persons Killed 300 5,000 250 4,800 200 4,600 150 4,400 100 4,200 50 4,000 3,800 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 4,851 5,070 4,820 4,291 4,525 Fatalities 165 189 178 145 162 Impaired Driving Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of impaired driving-related fatalities (BAC 0.08+) on all roads in Maryland from 145 in 2008 to fewer than 116 by December 31, 2015 (20% reduction). Impaired Driving Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of impaired driving-related injuries on all roads in Maryland from 4,291 in 2008 to fewer than 3,568 by December 31, 2015 (16.8% reduction). Figures 12 and 13 show the performance measures for impaired driving fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 10 0 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 12. Impaired Driving Fatality (BAC 0.08+) Objectives through 2015 170 132 165 128 Fatalities 160 124 155 120 150 116 145 140 135 2011 2012 2013 Year 2014 2015 Figure 13. Impaired Driving Injury Objectives through 2015 4,000 3,965 3,862 3,900 Injuries 3,800 3,761 3,664 3,700 3,600 3,568 3,500 3,400 3,300 2011 2012 2013 Year 2014 2015 To accomplish these objectives, the Impaired Driving Emphasis Area Team identified five strategies: Increase enforcement of alcohol and drug impaired driving laws; Support implementation of programs to reduce underage drinking and driving; and Enhance the prosecution and adjudication of alcohol and drug impaired driving cases; Integrate DUI data sources to ensure offender information is available to judges, prosecutors, and probation and parole. Conduct public awareness initiatives including education and media programs to reduce alcohol and drug impaired driving; 11 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Aggressive Driving An aggressive driving crash occurs when at least two or more of the following contributing factors are identified as causing the crash. o Failed to yield right-of-way; o Wrong way on a one way street; o Failed to obey stop sign; o Exceed speed limit; o Failed to obey traffic signal; o Too fast for conditions; o Failed to obey other traffic control; o Followed too closely; o Failed to keep right of center; o Improper lane change; and o Failed to stop for a school bus; o Improper passing. Figure 14 shows the fatalities and injuries sustained during such crashes from 2005 to 2009. Figure 14. Aggressive Driving Fatalities and Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured Persons Killed 4,600 100 4,500 90 80 4,400 70 4,300 60 4,200 50 4,100 40 30 4,000 20 3,900 3,800 10 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 4,060 4,505 4,242 4,203 4,050 Fatalities 62 88 76 63 54 Aggressive Driving Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of aggressive driving-related fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 63 in 2008 to fewer than 51 by December 31, 2015 (19.8 percent reduction). Aggressive Driving Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of aggressive driving-related injuries on all roads in Maryland from 4,203 in 2008 to fewer than 3,495 by December 31, 2015 (16.8 percent reduction). Figures 15 and 16 show the performance measures for aggressive driving fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 12 0 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 15. Aggressive Driving Fatality Objectives through 2015 Fatalities 58 57 57 56 56 55 54 54 53 52 52 51 51 50 49 48 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 16. Aggressive Driving Injury Objectives through 2015 Injuries 4,000 3,884 3,900 3,783 3,800 3,684 3,700 3,589 3,600 3,500 3,495 3,400 3,300 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year To accomplish these objectives, the Aggressive Driving Emphasis Area team identified five strategies: o Identify behaviors and target audiences by corridor, based on crash, citation, and Severity Rating Index data to focus aggressive driving enforcement, education, and engineering strategies; o Continue Maryland's involvement in the regional aggressive driving initiative such as the Smooth Operator; o Develop and implement year round, longterm public awareness and education campaigns identifying the dangers and consequences of aggressive driving behavior; o Develop and implement a statewide aggressive driving enforcement strategy that will be utilized throughout the year; and o Identify effective engineering solutions to eliminate or minimize aggressive driving in targeted corridors. 13 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Occupant Protection Non-use of safety equipment is not a contributing factor to crashes; however, in case a crash occurs, the injury sustained is more likely to be severe if safety equipment designed for occupant protection is not in use. Figure 17 shows the number of fatalities in such cases. Figure 117. Unrestrained Fatalities and Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured Persons Killed 180 3,000 160 2,500 140 120 2,000 100 1,500 80 60 1,000 40 500 0 20 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 2,850 2,705 2,394 2,212 1,988 Fatalities 167 167 162 153 134 Occupant Protection Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of unrestrained fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 153 in 2008 to fewer than 123 by December 31, 2015 (19.8 percent reduction). Occupant Protection Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of unrestrained injuries on all roads in Maryland from 2,212 in 2008 to fewer than 1,839 by December 31, 2015 (16.8 percent reduction). Figures 18 and 19 show the performance measures unrestrained fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 14 0 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 18. Unrestrained Fatality Objectives through 2015 Fatalities 145 139 140 135 135 131 130 127 125 123 120 115 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 19. Unrestrained Injury Objectives through 2015 Injuries 2,100 2,044 2,050 1,991 2,000 1,939 1,950 1,889 1,900 1,850 1,839 1,800 1,750 1,700 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year To accomplish these objectives, the Occupant Protection Emphasis Area Team identified four strategies: o Expand and refine Click It or Ticket and Law Enforcement Challenge; o Conduct a year round nighttime seatbelt enforcement and education program; o Increase the awareness of child passenger safety best practice recommendations for infants, children, and pre-drivers (up to age 16); and o Evaluate and recommend legislation and/or regulations that require the use of safety devices in all seating positions, with higher fines and points on the driver's license for noncompliance. 15 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Highway Infrastructure Intersection-related crashes, construction zone crashes, and run-off-the road crashes are the prime indicators of hazardous highways and are the data included in the highway infrastructure emphasis area. Figure 20 shows the fatalities and injuries sustained in such crashes. Figure 20. Highway Infrastructure-Related Fatalities and Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured Persons Killed 600 40,000 35,000 500 30,000 400 25,000 300 20,000 15,000 200 10,000 100 5,000 0 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 35,268 33,596 32,691 30,130 26,154 Fatalities 436 483 454 424 0 367 Highway Infrastructure Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of highway infrastructure fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 424 in 2008 to fewer than 340 by December 31, 2015 (19.8 percent reduction). Highway Infrastructure Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of highway infrastructure injuries on all roads in Maryland from 30,130 in 2008 to fewer than 25,056 by December 31, 2015 (16.8 percent reduction). Figures 21 and 22 show the performance measures for highway infrastructure fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 16 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 21. Highway Infrastructure Fatality Objectives through 2015 Fatalities 390 386 380 374 370 362 360 351 350 340 340 330 320 310 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 22. Highway Infrastructure Injury Objectives through 2015 Injuries 28,500 27,840 28,000 27,500 27,117 27,000 26,412 26,500 26,000 25,725 25,500 25,056 25,000 24,500 24,000 23,500 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year To accomplish these objectives, the Highway Infrastructure Emphasis Area Team identified three strategies. One of those strategies is to develop a corridor program, which will involve strategies and countermeasures from all the emphasis area teams. The team's strategies include the following: o Develop a corridor program that targets safety improvements where the severity index is high and that address roadway elements that contribute to crashes; o o Identify high crash locations (intersections and locations) and make safety improvements statewide; and Analyze data to identify system wide improvements to reduce the number and severity of infrastructure crashes, e.g., run-offthe-road, sight distance issues, etc. 17 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Emphasis Area: Pedestrian Crashes Among road users, pedestrians are probably the most vulnerable, with the proportion of pedestrian fatalities increasing over the last several years. Pedestrian fatalities now account for 20 percent of all fatalities in Maryland. Figure 23 indicates the number of fatalities and injuries sustained by pedestrians in the last five years. Figure 23. Pedestrian Fatalities and Injuries 2005 to 2009 Persons Injured Persons Killed 140 2,650 2,600 120 2,550 100 2,500 2,450 80 2,400 60 2,350 2,300 40 2,250 20 2,200 2,150 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Injuries 2,625 2,594 2,526 2,469 2,340 Fatalities 101 93 110 115 111 Pedestrian Fatality Objective: Reduce the annual number of pedestrian fatalities on all roads in Maryland from 115 in 2008 to fewer than 92 by December 31, 2015 (19.8 percent reduction). Pedestrian Injury Objective: Reduce the annual number of pedestrian injuries on all roads in Maryland from 2,469 in 2008 to fewer than 2,053 by December 31, 2015 (16.8 percent reduction). Figures 24 and 25 show the performance measures for pedestrian fatalities and injuries up to 2015. 18 0 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Figure 24. Pedestrian Fatality Objectives through 2015 Fatalities 110 105 105 101 100 98 95 95 92 90 85 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year Figure 25. Pedestrian Injury Objectives through 2015 Injuries 2,300 2,281 2,250 2,222 2,200 2,164 2,150 2,108 2,100 2,053 2,050 2,000 1,950 1,900 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Year To accomplish these objectives, the Pedestrian Emphasis Area Team identified the following four strategies: o Develop model processes to identify and prioritize high-incident locations and systemwide pedestrian safety issues; o Develop and evaluate model approaches to engineering built environments that accommodate safe pedestrian travel; o Develop and evaluate model approaches to improving pedestrian and motorist awareness and behavior, including enforcement efforts; and o education and Create partnerships among state, regional, and local stakeholders to develop action plans that address high-priority locations and system wide issues using comprehensive approaches to pedestrian safety. 19 Maryland S Strategic Highw Safety Plan way 2011-2015 Imp pleme entati ion Implemen ntation of the 2011-2015 SH will invol the collabo HSP lve orative work o professiona representin the of als ng discipline of transport es tation plannin engineering and operatio public ou ng, g ons, utreach and ed ducation, legis slation and law e enforcement, and emergenc medical ser a cy rvice systems. Each of thes disciplines h a critical r se has role to play in de efining the opt timal combina ation of counte ermeasures th will yield th best traffic safety outcom hat he mes. Implemen ntation of the 2011-2015 S e SHSP takes a new approa by focusi ach ing not only on the issues that cause the greatest num e mber of traffi safety prob ic blems, but on the locations as well. A k strategy i the n s key in Highway Infrastructur Emphasis A y re Area Team plan is to identify the top 20 non-intersta corridors in the 0 ate State that have the hig t ghest number of traffic-rela ated fatalities and serious i injuries. A special Task Force, including re l , epresentative from each es emphasis area team, will review data to de s w etermine the causes of crashes, fata f alities, and ser rious injuries along these s corridors and then se s, elect the app propriate SHS strategies SP and actio steps to de on evelop a coor rdinated imp plementation plan for each corri r idor. Focusin on these corridors, ng e however, does not me the entire state is not involved in , ean e efforts to improve tra o affic safety. SHA Districts, the MHSO , grant pro ogram, and th RTSP provi comprehe he ide ensive traffic safety pro ograms statew wide. In additio each emp on, phasis area te eam will revie statewide data to iden ew e ntify other loc cations that h have a high num mber of fatalit and seriou injuries, id ties us dentify statew wide issues tha affect traffi safety outco at ic omes, determin where the is a need for a joint effort with other emph ne ere d t hasis area te eams and de evelop implemen ntation plans for each targ geted location A coordina n. ated action am mong local im mplementing units, including law enforcement agencie transportation agencies outreach an education organizations and g es, s, nd s, emergenc medical service respond cy ders may be r required. As with a plan, it ca only be a s any an success if used to drive decision-making and guide s specific action To ns. ensure th plan imple hat ementation occurs, Maryla assigned lead agency responsibility for each str and y rategy and actio step. The SHSP calls for agencies and organizatio to stand u and provid leadership for a on S r d ons up de p strategy o action step for which th have exp or p hey pertise, interes or current responsibilit On a qua st, t ty. arterly basis, em mphasis area teams will m t meet to track p progress, iden ntify barriers or problems and discuss next s, s steps. M Maryland has developed a tool to assist these teams in tracking progress on i t s implementati of ion specific a actions, as wel as tracking progress tow ll ward achievin the emphas area's mea ng sis asurable objec ctives. There will be an upda of fatality and injury p ate y performance measures as new data bec comes available to determin whether sufficient progr ne ress is being m made in each of the plan's emphasis are eas. The SHSP Implementa P ation Team w meet quarterly during t five-year l of the SH to: will the life HSP o o o o Revie progress in each of the em ew n mphasis areas s; Provi assistance, when approp ide , priate, to overc come barriers or solve prob blems; Recei updates on SHSP-related campaigns, trainings, or o ive n d other program and ms; Provi guidance on future prog ide o grams, activities, etc. A yearly report will provide speci informati p ific ion on how w each tea is meeting their measu well am g urable fatality a and injury ob bjectives, alon with the level of prog ng gress for each action step Members o the h p. of Implemen ntation Team appear in the Appendix. m 20 Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan 2011-2015 Appendix Maryland Strategic Highway Safety Plan Implementation Team Bala Akundi, Baltimore Metropolitan Council Kevin Anderson, Maryland Transportation Authority Police April Armstrong, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Michelle Atwell, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Pam Beer, Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Vernon F. Betkey, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Tom Bryer, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Cindy Burch, National Study Center (NSC) Lora Byala, Four Square Integrated Jessica Capuano, Science Applications International Corporation (SAIC) Mary Dietz, State Highway Administration (SHA), Planning Kurt Erickson, Washington Regional Alcohol Program (WRAP) Lolita Fullard, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Tom Gianni, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Valerie Gompf, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) Jeremy Gunderson, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Larry Harmel, Maryland Chiefs of Police Association Breck Jeffers, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Patrick Kennedy, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Andy Krajewski, Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) Liza Lemaster, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Ron Lipps, State Highway Administration (SHA), Office of Traffic Safety Captain John McKissick, Howard County Police Department Jackie Milani, National Study Center (NSC) Peter Moe, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Doug Mowbray, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Lora Rakowski, State Highway Administration (SHA) Tim Richards, Maryland Highway Safety Office (MHSO) Nanette Schieke, Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) Randall Scott, Baltimore City Department of Transportation 21