State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan Federal Fiscal Year 2014 prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration prepared by Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Janice K. Brewer Governor State of Arizona Alberto C. Gutier Director and Governor’s Highway Safety Representative State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan Federal Fiscal Year 2014 prepared for U.S. Department of Transportation National Highway Traffic Safety Administration prepared by Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety 3030 North Central Avenue, Suite 1550 Phoenix, Arizona 85012 date July 2013 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table of Contents Introduction .................................................................................................................... ix Mission Statement ......................................................................................................... xi 1.0 Arizona’s Highway Safety Planning Process ................................................... 1 1.1 Planning Process ............................................................................................ 1 1.2 GOHS Organization ...................................................................................... 3 1.3 Problem Identification .................................................................................. 5 1.4 Performance Measures .................................................................................. 6 1.5 Highway Safety Trends and Goals.............................................................. 7 1.6 Additional Data and Analysis ................................................................... 19 1.7 Coordination with the Strategic Highway Safety Plan .......................... 24 2.0 Highway Safety Performance Plan................................................................... 25 2.1 Highway Safety Goals for FFY 2014 ......................................................... 25 3.0 Highway Safety Strategies and Projects .......................................................... 27 3.1 Impaired Driving Program Overview ...................................................... 29 3.2 Occupant Protection Program Overview ................................................. 38 3.3 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Program Overview....................................................................................................... 44 3.4 Motorcycle Safety Program Overview ..................................................... 51 3.5 Traffic Records Program Overview .......................................................... 54 3.6 Crash Investigation Program Overview................................................... 56 3.7 Emergency Medical Services Program Overview ................................... 58 3.8 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program Overview ................................. 60 3.9 Planning and Administration Program Overview ................................. 63 3.10 NHTSA Equipment Approval ................................................................... 65 3.11 Paid Advertising .......................................................................................... 67 3.12 164 Transfer Funds Program Overview ................................................... 68 8856-001 4.0 Performance Report ............................................................................................. 71 5.0 Cost Summary ...................................................................................................... 73 6.0 State Certifications and Assurances ................................................................. 77 7.0 Section 405 Grant Application .......................................................................... 89 i Table of Contents, continued ii A. Appendix: DUI Abatement Council............................................................... A-1 B. Appendix: Supporting Information ............................................................... B-5 8856-001 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 List of Tables Table 1.1 Arizona Crash Conditions as Percent of Total Fatalities 2012 .............. 5 Table 1.2 Arizona Performance Measures ................................................................ 7 Table 1.3 Arizona Highway Safety Trends .............................................................. 8 Table 1.4 Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Age 4 and Below ...................................... 20 Table 1.5 Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Age 5 and Above ...................................... 20 Table 1.6 Fatalities by Person Type and Race/Hispanic Origin ......................... 20 Table 1.7 Fatalities by Person Type ......................................................................... 21 Table 1.8 Fatalities by Crash Type ........................................................................... 22 Table 2.1 Performance Targets and Measures ....................................................... 25 Table 3.1 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 30 Table 3.2 Impaired Driving Enforcement Program .............................................. 31 Table 3.3 Impaired Driving Enforcement Equipment Program .......................... 33 Table 3.4 Impaired Driving Training Program ...................................................... 35 Table 3.5 Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Program......................................... 35 Table 3.6 Impaired Driving Awareness Program ................................................. 36 Table 3.7 Impaired Driving Program Summary Budget ...................................... 37 Table 3.8 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 38 Table 3.9 Safety Belt Survey ..................................................................................... 39 Table 3.10 Occupant Protection Enforcement Program ......................................... 40 Table 3.11 Occupant Protection Equipment Program ............................................ 40 Table 3.12 Occupant Protection Training Program................................................. 41 Table 3.13 Occupant Protection Materials and Supplies ........................................ 42 Table 3.14 Occupant Protection Awareness Program ............................................ 42 Table 3.15 Occupant Protection Program Administration..................................... 43 Table 3.16 Occupant Protection Program Summary Budget ................................. 43 Table 3.17 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 44 Table 3.18 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Enforcement Program .............................................................................. 45 iii List of Tables, continued Table 3.19 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Equipment Program ................................................................................. 47 Table 3.20 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Awareness Program.................................................................................. 48 Table 3.21 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Training Program ...................................................................................... 49 Table 3.22 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Survey........ 49 Table 3.23 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Program Administration .......................................................................... 49 Table 3.24 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, Red Light Running Program Summary Budget ...................................................................................... 50 Table 3.25 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 51 Table 3.26 Motorcycle Helmet Survey ...................................................................... 52 Table 3.27 Motorcycle Enforcement Program.......................................................... 52 Table 3.28 Motorcycle Awareness Program ............................................................. 53 Table 3.29 Motorcycle Safety Program Summary Budget ..................................... 53 Table 3.30 Traffic Records Data Collection Equipment Program ......................... 54 Table 3.31 Traffic Records Data Collection, Evaluation, and Analysis ................ 55 Table 3.32 Traffic Records Program Administration .............................................. 55 Table 3.33 Traffic Records Program Summary Budget .......................................... 55 Table 3.34 Crash Investigation Enforcement Program ........................................... 56 Table 3.35 Crash Investigation Equipment Program .............................................. 57 Table 3.36 Crash Investigation Training Program .................................................. 57 Table 3.37 Crash Investigation Program Summary Budget .................................. 57 Table 3.38 Crash Extrication Equipment Program .................................................. 58 Table 3.39 Crash Extrication Training Program ...................................................... 59 Table 3.40 Emergency Medical Services Program Summary Budget................... 59 Table 3.41 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 60 Table 3.42 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Enforcement Program .......................... 60 Table 3.43 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Awareness Program ............................. 61 Table 3.44 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Roadway Signs and Materials ............ 62 Table 3.45 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program Summary Budget ................. 62 iv 8856-001 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.46 Performance Goals and Measures .......................................................... 63 Table 3.47 Program Administration Cost Summary............................................... 64 Table 3.48 Equipment Program in Excess of $5,000.00 for NHTSA Approval .................................................................................................... 65 Table 3.49 Paid Advertising Summary ..................................................................... 67 Table 3.50 Transfer Funds Program Summary ........................................................ 68 Table A.1 DUI Abatement Council Grant Awards as of June 17, 2013 ............. A-3 v State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 List of Figures Figure 1.1 The Highway Safety Planning Process .................................................. 2 Figure 1.2 Organizational Chart ................................................................................ 4 Figure 1.3 Fatalities...................................................................................................... 9 Figure 1.4 Traffic Injuries.......................................................................................... 10 Figure 1.5 Fatality Rate ............................................................................................. 11 Figure 1.6 Unrestrained Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities ........................ 12 Figure 1.7 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities .................................................... 13 Figure 1.8 Speeding-Related Fatalities.................................................................... 14 Figure 1.9 Motorcycle Fatalities ............................................................................... 15 Figure 1.10 Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatalities ........................................................ 16 Figure 1.11 Drivers Age 20 or Younger in Fatal Crashes ....................................... 17 Figure 1.12 Pedestrian Fatalities ................................................................................ 18 Figure 1.13 Percent Observed Seat Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles .................... 19 Figure 1.14 Fatalities by County 2011 and 2012 ....................................................... 22 Figure 1.15 Crashes and Fatal Crashes by Day of Week 2012 ............................... 23 Figure 1.16 Crashes and Fatal Crashes by Month 2012 .......................................... 23 Figure 4.1 Progress in Meeting FFY 2013 Performance Targets.......................... 72 Figure B.1 Arizona Statewide Roadway Fatalities Trend .................................. B-5 Figure B.2 Arizona Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities By Month ......................... B-6 Figure B.3 Arizona Traffic Fatalities Monthly Trend ............................................ B-7 Figure B.4 Arizona DUI Enforcement Statistics for Calendar Year 2012 ......... B-8 Figure B.5 2012 East Valley Holiday DUI Task Force ......................................... B-9 Figure B.6 Mesa Police Department Alcohol and Drug Cases 2012 ............... B-10 vii State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Introduction The Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) is the focal point for highway safety issues in Arizona. GOHS is a cabinet agency that provides leadership by developing, promoting, and coordinating programs; influencing public and private policy; and increasing public awareness of highway safety. The 2014 HSP is composed of seven sections – Arizona’s Highway Safety Planning Process, Highway Safety Performance Plan, Highway Safety Strategies and Projects, Performance Report, Program Cost Summary, Certifications and Assurances, and Section 405 Grant Application. The Planning Process (Section 1.0) discusses the data sources and processes used to identify Arizona’s highway safety problems and establish highway safety performance. It details, through thoughtful and thorough data analysis and problem identification, the progress Arizona is making in addressing its most significant behavioral safety problems, including impaired driving, speeding and aggressive driving, and occupant protection. These issues, which align with the national priority areas identified by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), are linked through specific performance measures and targets to Arizona’s goal of reducing fatalities across all program areas in the Performance Plan (Section 2.0). The Highway Safety Strategies and Projects (Section 3.0) chapter describes the projects and activities the Arizona GOHS will implement to achieve the goals and objectives outlined in the Performance Plan. It details how Federal funds provided under the Section 402 (State and Community Highway Safety Program), 405 (National Priority Safety Programs) grant programs, and other funding will be used to support these initiatives along with Arizona’s traffic records system. Continued assessment and investment in the latter is essential for maximizing the efficiency and effectiveness of traffic records data collection and analysis. The Performance Report (Section 4.0) is a new Federal requirement. This program area report focuses on Arizona’s success in meeting the performance targets for the core performance measures identified in the FFY 2013 HSP. The Program Cost Summary (Section 5.0) details the proposed allocation of funds (including carry-forward funds) by program area based on the goals identified in the Performance Plan (Section 2.0) and the projects and activities outlined in the Highway Safety Strategies and Projects (Section 3.0). The funding level is based on what the GOHS estimates its share will be under the Federal grant programs for the 2014 Federal Fiscal Year. The Certifications and Assurances (Section 6.0) chapter includes a certification statement signed by the Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety. This outlines the measures the State will take to ensure compliance with all applicable laws and regulations, and financial and programmatic requirements mandated under the Section 402 program. ix State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 The Section 405 application Appendix D is presented in Section 7.0. In previous years, national-priority safety programs were funded through a variety of Federal grant programs. Under the recently enacted Federal transportation funding legislation known as MAP-21 (Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century), these grant programs (e.g., Section 405 Occupant Protection, Section 408 Traffic Safety Information System, Section 410 Alcohol Incentive, Section 2010 Motorcycle Safety, Section 2011 Child Safety and Child Booster Seats) were merged into a single program, Section 405. In FFY 2014, Arizona is applying for Section 405 funds to address State Traffic Safety Information System Improvements, Impaired Driving Countermeasures, and Motorcyclist Safety. Arizona GOHS slogan and logo. x State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Mission Statement GOHS, as the focal point for highway safety issues in Arizona, provides leadership by developing, promoting, and coordinating programs; influencing public and private policy; and increasing public awareness of highway safety. GOHS Director Alberto Gutier opens the GOHS 2012 Statewide DUI News Conference at the Arizona Capitol. Present were six members from Governor Jan Brewer’s Cabinet, Sheriff Joe Arpaio, a couple dozen police chiefs, including new Phoenix Chief of Police Danny Garcia, representatives from MADD, SADD, prosecutors, and over 100 police officers and sheriff deputies from all over Arizona. This yearly event that was started by Director Gutier in 1995 emphasizes besides DUI, seat belt, child seats, speeding, and the enforcement of all traffic laws. xi State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 1.0 Arizona’s Highway Safety Planning Process Arizona Revised Statutes §28-602 designates the Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety (GOHS) as the appropriate agency to administer highway safety programs in the State. Executive Order 2004-24 designates the GOHS as the State Highway Safety Agency to administer the Highway Safety Plan (HSP) on behalf of the Governor. GOHS produces the annual HSP to serve as the implementation guide for highway safety projects throughout Arizona. The HSP also is an application for funding through the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). Project selection is data driven and utilizes state and national traffic safety data (e.g., crashes, fatalities, injuries, citations, etc.). Knowledge of the Arizona political, economic, and demographic environments, as well as highway safety expertise on the part of staff and other partners also are taken into account where appropriate. The three leading causes of death from vehicular collisions in Arizona are impaired driving, speeding and aggressive driving, and unrestrained vehicle occupants. Consequently, the majority of funding in the FY 2014 HSP is devoted to Impaired Driving, Police Traffic Services, and Occupant Protection. GOHS has established a channel of communication and understanding among the Governor’s Office, the Legislature, state agencies, political subdivisions, and community groups to address these and other aspects of the statewide highway safety program. 1.1 PLANNING PROCESS In Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) 2013, the reauthorization legislation known as Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) advanced the HSP grant cycle five months. As a result, GOHS will submit the HSP by July 1 and be able to fund FFY 2014 grants on October 1, 2013. Programs starting on October 1 will be funded utilizing available carry forward funds until GOHS receives current year funding from Congress. Figure 1.1 below shows the Arizona Highway Safety Planning process. 1 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure 1.1 The Highway Safety Planning Process January • Receive Next FFY Proposals • Proposals Due to GOHS by Mid-February December • Request for Proposal Next FFY • Annual Performance Report (APR) for Previous FFY Completed March/April • “Major Agency Grant Proposals” • Next FFY Proposals Evaluated & Prioritized by Program Area November • Proposal Guide for Next Federal Fiscal Year Mailed to Grantees • November 1, Previous FFY Final Reports of Cost Incured (RCI) Due to GOHS May • Final Funding Decisions Made and Selection Completed • Agencies Notified by Mail of Status of Their Grant Requests October • Federal Fiscal Year begins October 1st • Grants Implemented • Agencies may start spending or ordering June/July • Grant Contracts Prepared by GOHS Staff • Highway Safety Plan (HSP) Developed and Completed for Next FFY September • FFY Ends September 30th • Next FFY Grants Finalized August • Final Agreements Reviewed and Mailed to Agencies In November of each year, a letter outlining the Proposal Process and priority program areas is sent to political subdivisions, state agencies, and nonprofits regarding the GOHS Proposal Process. All statewide law enforcement and nonprofit agencies are encouraged to participate actively in Arizona’s Highway Safety Program. In addition to the written notification, the letter and proposal Guide are posted on the GOHS web site. Proposals are due to the GOHS through the GOHS e-grants system in midFebruary. Each proposal is assigned a number and pertinent information is added to an Excel spreadsheet. Meetings with the GOHS Director, Executive Assistant, Comptroller, Grant Coordinator, and Project Coordinators to review the proposals take place from March through April. During these meetings each proposal is discussed and the level of funding is determined. These discussions are centered on the following evaluation criteria: • 2 Is the proposal eligible for funding? State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 • Does the proposal address one or more of the priority areas identified in the proposal letter? • Did the submitting agency follow the guidelines set forth in the Proposal Guide; e.g., the agency provided: • – Data; – Statistics; – A cover letter signed by agency head; and – Other. GOHS Grants Philosophy: Grants for Performance Has the agency previously been included in the HSP? – If yes, how did they perform? – Were narrative and financial reports completed in accordance with contractual requirements? When evaluating grant applications, GOHS bases decisions on an agency’s past performance. If an agency exhibits poor performance – operationally or financially, it is less likely to receive funding. Conversely, GOHS rewards top performing agencies with additional funding. GOHS requires grantees requesting $100,000 or greater and nonprofit applicants to make formal presentations before GOHS staff. These presentations provide agency background information and an overview of the project request. This process allows the GOHS Director and staff to ask questions and better assess the grant application. GOHS’s policy is to fund all proposals that meet the criteria to ensure the HSP is representative of the entire State. Once the grants and funding levels are determined by program area, Project Coordinators begin writing contracts so they can be mailed to grantees by early September. During this time, the Director, Project Manager, and Comptroller begin HSP development. Agencies review grant contracts in September and gain approval (if necessary) from appropriate governing boards and councils. Once completed, the GOHS Director signs the contract and the agency can begin incurring costs pursuant to the grant contract. 1.2 GOHS ORGANIZATION GOHS is led by the Director, Alberto C. Gutier, who is appointed by and reports to the Governor of Arizona, Janice K. Brewer. Mr. Gutier is supported by an administrative staff headed by Executive Assistant, Mari Hembeck; financial staff headed by the Chief Financial Officer Comptroller, Lori Boncoskey; and project management staff. The dotted lines in Figure 1.2 depict The Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor and Special Project coordinator. These two positions are supported by GOHS and housed in offices outside the GOHS office. 3 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure 1.2 Organizational Chart Janice K. Brewer Governor Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Director Beth Barnes PHX Prosecutor/TSRP Alberto Gutier (GR, PIO, Procurement Officer and Legislative Liaison) Executive Assistant Chief Financial Officer/Comptroller Mari Hembeck Lori Boncoskey Stephanie Gonzalez Administrative Assistant II Liz Peña Project Coordinator/ Occupant Protection María Sanchez IT/Project Coordinator Vacant GOHS staff. 4 Phil Corbell Special Projects Project Manager Grants/Reports Senior Project and Impaired Driving Coordinator David Horn Bridget Reutter Benjamin Deemer Project Coordinator TR, AL, MC Dannie Maynard Fiscal Specialist Michelle Harrington Project Coordinator PS, AI State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 1.3 PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION The GOHS supports activities having the greatest potential to save lives, reduce injuries, and improve highway safety in Arizona. A broad range of data was analyzed, together with highway safety research and the expertise of GOHS staff, to identify the most significant safety problems in the State. The relative magnitude of the various contributing crash factors was reviewed and tracked over time, as were the demographic characteristics of drivers and crash victims and whether they used, or did not use, appropriate safety equipment. Sources of highway safety data and research used by the GOHS include the following: • Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS); • National Occupant Protection and Use Survey; • National Highway Traffic Safety Administration; • Arizona Governor’s Office of Highway Safety, Web Site Reporting System; • Arizona Department of Transportation, Information Technology Group; • Arizona Department of Transportation, Motor Vehicle Division; • Arizona Department of Public Safety, Crime Lab Reports; • Arizona Department of Health Services, Health and Vital Statistics Section; • Arizona Motorcycle Safety Council; • Arizona DUI Abatement Council; • Arizona Association of Chiefs of Police; • Arizona Sheriffs Association; • Arizona Prosecuting Attorneys Advisory Council; and • National Safety Council. Table 1.1 below shows the relative importance of the various contributing crash factors and demographics to crash fatalities in Arizona in 2012. Table 1.1 Arizona Crash Conditions as Percent of Total Fatalities 2012 Unrestrained Vehicle Occupant Alcohol Impaired Driving Speeding Related 38% 34% 34% Motorcycle Drivers Age 20 and Younger Pedestrians 17% 12% 16% Source: ADOT. 5 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 These data show that speeding, unrestrained occupants, and alcohol impairment are the three most important factors contributing to crash fatalities in Arizona. Therefore the GOHS is focusing its resources to address these areas through the following Tier 1 program areas: • Alcohol and Other Drugs (AL) – To reduce the number and severity of crashes in which alcohol and/or drugs are contributing factors. • Police Traffic Services (PT) – To achieve and maintain compliance with traffic laws such as aggressive driving, speeding, and red light running. Enforcement must be consistent, impartial and uniformly applied to all street and highway users. • Occupant Protection (OP) – To increase the statewide seat belt/child safety seat (CSS) usage rate of motor vehicle occupants and to increase public information and education of the benefits of seat belt/CSS usage for adults and children. Other conditions and contributing crash factors also are addressed in the HSP and are tracked through the following Tier 2 program areas: • Accident Investigation (AI) – To provide training and resources for vehicular crimes units to more effectively aide in the investigation and prosecution of fatal traffic collisions. • Traffic Records (TR) – To develop a comprehensive data processing system that brings together the engineering, enforcement, educational, medical, behavioral health, prosecution, judicial, correctional, and emergency response disciplines. • Emergency Medical Services (EM) – To support rural first responders with emergency medical services (EMS) equipment. • Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Safety (MC/PS) – To increase the public’s awareness and understanding of and participation in motorcycle, bicycle, and pedestrian safety. • Roadway Safety (RS) – To improve traffic conditions in identified corridors and local jurisdictions by funding minor traffic engineering improvements, correcting signing deficiencies and promoting safety programs. 1.4 PERFORMANCE MEASURES The primary highway safety goal for Arizona is to reduce fatalities across all program areas. The GOHS tracks performance measures based on FARS data in combination with several other data sources to understand trends and set safety performance targets. Table 1.2 below summarizes the performance measures tracked by the GOHS. 6 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 1.2 Type Arizona Performance Measures Program Area Performance Measure Data Source Outcome Overall Number of traffic-related fatalities. FARS, ADOT Outcome Overall Number of traffic-related injuries. ADOT Outcome Overall Fatalities per 100 million VMT. FARS Outcome Alcohol and Other Drugs (AL) Number of fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of 0.08 percent or greater. FARS, ADOT Outcome Occupant Protection (OP) Number of unrestrained vehicle occupant fatalities in all seating positions. FARS, ADOT Behavior Occupant Protection (OP) Percent of front seat vehicle occupants who are observed using safety belts. Survey Outcome Police Traffic Services (PT) Number of speeding-related fatalities. FARS, ADOT Outcome Police Traffic Services (PT), Alcohol and Other Drugs (AL), Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Safety (MC/PS), and Occupant Protection (OP) FARS, ADOT Outcome Number of motorcycle fatalities. Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Safety (MC/PS) FARS, ADOT Outcome Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Number of unhelmeted motorcycle Pedestrian Safety (MC/PS) fatalities. FARS, ADOT Outcome Number of pedestrian fatalities. Motorcycle, Bicycle, and Pedestrian Safety (MC/PS) FARS, ADOT Activity Occupant Protection (OP) Number of Seat Belt Citations issued. Grant Activity Reports and GOHS Web Site Reporting System Activity Alcohol and Other Drugs (AL) Number of Impaired Driving arrests made during grant-funded enforcement. Grant Activity Reports and GOHS Web Site Reporting System Activity Police Traffic Services (PT) Number of Speeding Citations issued during grant-funded enforcement. Number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes. Grant Activity Reports and GOHS Web Site Reporting System Sources: Arizona GOHS and NHTSA. 1.5 HIGHWAY SAFETY TRENDS AND GOALS Table 1.3 below shows the data points associated with the performance measures identified in the previous section. 7 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 1.3 Arizona Highway Safety Trends 2008 2009 2010 2011 5-Year 2012a Average 2014 Goal 938 806 759 825 823 830 820 56,009 50,786 50,421 49,710 49,646 51,314 49,551 Fatalities/100M VMT 1.52 1.31 1.26 1.44 1.37 Passenger Unrestrained Vehicle Occupant Fatalities 330 248 235 219 313 269 265 Alcohol Impaired Driving Fatalities (BAC = 0.08%+) 262 218 206 215 281 236 270 Speeding-Related Fatalities 389 293 262 294 279 303 279 Total Motorcycle Fatalities 141 121 91 136 139 126 136 Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatalities 68 66 50 73 66 65 65 Drivers Age 20 or Younger in Fatal Crashes 153 95 79 116 97 108 96 Pedestrian Fatalities 121 118 145 147 132 133 131 Percent Observed Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles 79.9% 80.8% 81.8% 82.9% 82.2% 81.5% 83.1% Number of Seat Belt Citations Issued 1,132 3,323 5,409 21,828 28,778 12,094 N/A Number of Impaired Driving Arrests Made 10,409 14,154 19,353 31,561 30,548 21,205 N/A Number of Other Citations (including speed) Issuedb 43,846 73,600 99,833 331,269 349,703 179,650 N/A Fatalities Traffic Injuriesa Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (all 2008 through 2011 data except injuries); ADOT for traffic injury data and all 2012 data. GOHS Reporting System. Notes: a Five-Year Average is for 2008 through 2012, except for the fatality rate which is the 5-year average of years 2007 through 2011. For yearly ADOT fatality data going back to 1984 and monthly data back to 2003, please see Figures B.1, B.2, and B.3 in Appendix B. b In 2012, there were 349,703 citations issued for speed and aggressive driving which includes, speed not reasonable or prudent, excessive speed, speed not right for conditions, and reckless driving while speeding or other citations issued for other moving violations like red light running. Arizona is continually improving the capture of citation data recorded in our tracking system. 8 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Fatalities The total number of fatalities decreased slightly from 825 in 2011 to 823 in 2012. This level is significantly higher than the 759 fatalities in 2010 but much lower than the record year of 2006 when Arizona recorded 1,293 fatalities. These numbers can be explained in part by the economic recovery that began in 2011. This resulted in higher employment, rising home values, and increasing business activity and created new demand for automobiles and motorcycles and increased VMT. The overall fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.3 below. Figure 1.3 Fatalities Fatalities 1,400 1,200 1,000 823 820 2013 2014 800 600 400 200 0 1,071 938 806 759 825 823 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of Fatality Goal-Setting Process The GOHS has set the 2014 fatality goal at 820. This is three less than the 823 fatalities experienced in 2012 and 10 less than the 5-year moving average of 830. Because of the facts of an improving economy and continued increases in VMT combined with an apparent regression to the mean (as evident in Figure 1.3 above) the GOHS considers the goal of 820 fatalities in 2014 to be aggressive yet achievable. 9 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Injuries The total number of injuries has remained essentially constant in 2012 as compared to 2011. This level is significantly higher than the 68,574 injuries recorded in 2006. The leveling process seen in recent years can be explained with the same economic growth argument as described in the fatality discussion in the previous section. Essentially, the economic recovery that began in 2010 resulted in higher employment, rising home values, and increasing business activity and created new demand for automobiles and motorcycles and increased VMT along with a corresponding number of injuries. The overall injury trend is shown in Figure 1.4 below. Figure 1.4 Traffic Injuries Injuries 80,000 70,000 60,000 50,433 49,551 2013 2014 50,000 40,000 50,421 49,710 49,646 0 50,786 10,000 56,009 20,000 65,705 30,000 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Source: ADOT. Explanation of Injury Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 injury goal at 49,551. This is slightly less than the 49,646 injuries experienced in 2012 and 3.4 percent less than the 5-year moving average of 51,314. Because of the facts of an improving economy and continued increases in VMT combined with an apparent regression to the mean (as evident in Figure 1.4 above) the GOHS considers this goal to be aggressive yet achievable. 10 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Fatality Rate The fatality rate per 100 million VMT increased from 1.26 in 2010 to 1.39 in 2011. This increase followed a succession of years where the rate decreased from 2.07 per 100 million VMT in 2006 and likely represents a regression to the mean. The 5-year moving average data show a nearly straight line decrease from 2007 to 2011. The overall fatality rate trend is shown in Figure 1.5 below. Figure 1.5 Fatality Rate Fatality Rate 2.50 2.00 1.50 1.41 1.39 1.37 2012 2013 2014 1.00 0.50 0.00 1.70 1.52 1.31 1.27 1.38 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Fatality Rate Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Source: Fatality Analysis Reporting System Explanation of Fatality Rate Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 fatality rate goal at 1.37 per 100 million VMT. This is nearly the same as the 1.38 million per 100 million VMT experienced in 2011 but 4.9 percent less than the 2011 5-year moving average of 1.44. 11 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Unrestrained Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatalities increased significantly from 219 in 2011 to 313 in 2012. This followed a succession of years where the number of fatalities decreased year by year from 469 in 2006 and likely represents a regression to the mean. The 5-year moving average data show a nearly straight line decrease from 2007 to 2011 and the beginnings of a leveling off process between 2011 and 2012. The overall unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.6 below. Figure 1.6 Unrestrained Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Fatalities 450 400 350 300 267 265 2013 2014 250 200 150 100 50 0 379 330 248 235 219 313 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Unrestrained Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatality Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 unrestrained passenger vehicle occupant fatality goal at 265. This is significantly less than the 313 fatalities experienced in 2012 and nearly the same as the 2012 5-year moving average of 269. 12 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities Alcohol-impaired driving fatalities increased significantly from 215 in 2011 to 281 in 2012. This followed a succession of years where the number of fatalities decreased year by year from 399 in 2006 and likely represents a regression to the mean. The 5-year moving average data show a steady decrease from 2007 to 2011 and the beginnings of a leveling off process between 2011 and 2012. The overall alcohol-impaired driving fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.7 below. Figure 1.7 Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatalities Fatalities 400 350 300 276 270 2013 2014 250 200 150 100 50 0 337 262 218 206 215 281 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Alcohol-Impaired Driving Fatality Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 alcoholimpaired driving fatality goal at 270. This is 3.9 percent less than the 281 fatalities experienced in 2012. Arizona has some of the toughest impaired driving laws in the nation and is nationally recognized as having the best trained officers in the detection of alcohol- and drug-impaired drivers. In 2012, over 30,000 DUI arrests (and over 4,000 drug-impaired arrests) were made. Through continued emphasis on enforcement and education, the GOHS believes the goal of reducing alcohol-impaired fatalities to 270 by 2014 is appropriate and achievable. 13 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Speeding-Related Fatalities Speeding-related fatalities decreased slightly from 294 in 2011 to 279 in 2012. This is still higher than the 2010 figure of 262 fatalities, but significantly lower that the levels seen in the years prior to 2008. The 5-year moving average data show a steady decrease from 2007 to 2011. The overall speeding-related fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.8 below. Figure 1.8 Speeding-Related Fatalities Fatalities 600 500 400 300 291 279 2013 2014 200 100 0 452 389 293 262 294 279 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Speeding-Related Fatality Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 speedingrelated fatality goal at 279. This goal is equal to the number of speeding-related fatalities in 2012, but continues the downward trend evident in the 5-year moving average data. 14 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Motorcycle Fatalities Motorcycle fatalities increased slightly from 136 in 2011 to 139 in 2012. This followed a steep increase during the previous year (up 49 percent between 2010 and 2011). Despite this volatility, the 5-year moving average has remained between 125 and 135 for the past six years. The overall motorcycle fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.9 below. Figure 1.9 Motorcycle Fatalities Fatalities 160 140 138 136 2013 2014 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 135 141 121 91 136 139 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Motorcycle Fatality Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 motorcycle fatality goal at 136. This is the same as the 2011 fatality number and slightly less than the 139 fatalities experienced in 2012. Over 30,000 new motorcycle registrations were issued in 2010 corresponding to the steep increase in fatalities that year. With continued growth in motorcycle registrations and pick up in the economy, the GOHS believes the goal of stopping the recent rise in motorcycle fatalities is quite aggressive. 15 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatalities Unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities decreased from 73 in 2011 to 66 in 2012. This followed a steep increase during the previous year (up 46 percent between 2010 and 2011). Despite this volatility, the 5-year moving average has steadily declined from 76 in 2007 to 65 in 2012. The unhelmeted motorcycle fatality trend is shown in Figure 1.10 below. Figure 1.10 Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatalities Fatalities 80 70 65 65 2013 2014 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 71 68 66 50 73 66 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatality Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 unhelmeted motorcycle fatality goal at 65. This is the same as the most recent 5-year average and slightly less than the 66 fatalities in 2012. With continued growth in motorcycle registrations, the lack of a helmet law, and pick up in the economy, the GOHS believes the goal of maintaining the number of unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities at 65 in 2014 is quite aggressive. 16 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Young Drivers in Fatal Crashes The number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes decreased from 116 in 2011 to 97 in 2012. This followed a steep increase during the previous year (up 47 percent between 2010 and 2011). Despite this volatility, the 5-year moving average has steadily declined from just under 200 in 2007 to 108 in 2012. The trend is shown in Figure 1.11 below. Figure 1.11 Drivers Age 20 or Younger in Fatal Crashes Fatalities 250 200 150 102 96 2013 2014 100 50 0 180 153 95 79 116 97 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Drivers Age 20 or Younger in Fatal Crashes Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 goal for the number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes at 96. This is close to the 2012 level of 97 and 11 percent less than the latest 5-year average. 17 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Pedestrian Fatalities The number of pedestrian fatalities decreased from 147 in 2011 to 132 in 2012. The 5-year moving average has been declining slowly from 146 in 2007 to 133 in 2012. The trend is shown in Figure 1.12 below. Figure 1.12 Pedestrian Fatalities Fatalities 180 160 140 132 131 2013 2014 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 154 121 118 145 147 132 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Actual Arizona Target 5-Year Moving Average Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (2007 through 2011 data); ADOT for 2012 data. Explanation of the Pedestrian Fatalities Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 goal for pedestrian fatalities at 131. This is slightly less than the 2012-level of 132 and the latest 5-year average of 133. 18 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Percent Observed Seat Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles The observed seat belt rate decreased from 82.9 percent in 2011 to 82.2 percent in 2012. The 5-year moving average data show a steady increase from 2010 to 2012. The overall observed seat belt rate trend is shown in Figure 1.13 below. Figure 1.13 Percent Observed Seat Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles Seat Belt Use Rate (Percent) 88 86 84 82.3 83.1 82 80 78 76 80.9 79.9 80.8 81.8 82.9 82.2 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Seat Belt Use Rate Arizona Target 2013 2014 5-Year Moving Average Source: State surveys. Explanation of the Percent Observed Seat Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles Goal-Setting Process Based on the trend data shown above, the GOHS has set the 2014 goal for observed seat belt use at 83.1 percent. This continues the steady increases seen in the 5-year moving average numbers. 1.6 ADDITIONAL DATA AND ANALYSIS The GOHS, analyzes a variety of other safety data as part of the problem identification and performance goal setting process. In particular, the GOHS analyzes safety data related to who is being impacted (age and ethnicity), what types of vehicles are involved, where the crashes are occurring (counties), and when they are taking place (time of day, day of week, and month of year). These data are shown in the following series of tables. 19 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 1.4 Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Age 4 and Below 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Restrained 3 9 6 3 2 Unrestrained 2 2 4 3 3 Unknown Restraint Use 2 9 4 7 7 Total 7 20 14 13 12 Source: Arizona Crash Facts, ADOT. Table 1.5 Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Age 5 and Above 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Restrained 268 212 183 221 240 Unrestrained 331 319 262 289 310 Unknown Restraint Use 109 108 129 125 111 Total 708 639 574 635 661 Source: Arizona Crash Facts, ADOT. Table 1.6 below displays the fatalities by race and ethnicity from 2007 through 2011. Table 1.6 Fatalities by Person Type and Race/Hispanic Origin Person Type by Race/Hispanic Origin 2007 2008 2009 Occupants (All Vehicle Types) Hispanic 266 220 150 1 90 White, Non-Hispanic 463 435 297 13 293 Black, Non-Hispanic 28 25 25 0 22 107 84 67 4 80 2 5 5 1 2 18 15 17 0 0 4 8 97 567 162 888 792 658 586 649 Hispanic 54 35 38 2 37 White, Non-Hispanic 87 70 49 6 56 Black, Non-Hispanic 5 9 7 0 4 33 29 19 4 31 American Indian, Non-Hispanic/Unknown Asian, Non-Hispanic/ Unknown All Other Non-Hispanic Unknown Race and Unknown Hispanic Total Nonoccupants (Pedestrians, Pedacyclists and Other/Unknown Nonoccupants) 20 American Indian, Non-Hispanic/Unknown 2010 2011 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Person Type by Race/Hispanic Origin 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Asian, Non-Hispanic/ Unknown 2 0 1 0 1 All Other Non-Hispanic 0 1 8 0 0 Unknown Race and Unknown Hispanic 2 2 26 161 48 183 146 148 173 77 1,071 938 806 759 826 Total Total Source: Fatality Analysis Reporting System. Table 1.7 displays fatalities by person and vehicle type. Table 1.7 Fatalities by Person Type 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 No. Per. No. Per. No. Per. No. Per. No. Per. Passenger Car 357 33 299 32 209 26 184 24 198 24 Light Truck – Pickup 167 16 130 14 88 11 111 15 94 11 Light Truck – Utility 140 13 132 14 120 15 100 13 121 15 Light Truck – Van 35 3 34 4 43 5 23 3 20 2 Light Truck – Other 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 20 2 19 2 9 1 5 1 16 2 0 0 0 0 7 1 6 1 1 0 34 3 37 4 60 7 67 9 64 8 Total Occupants 753 70 651 69 536 66 496 65 514 62 Motorcyclists Total Motorcyclists 135 13 141 15 121 154 92 12 135 16 Nonoccupants Pedestrian 154 14 121 13 120 15 146 19 147 18 21 2 19 2 25 3 19 2 23 3 Other/Unknown Nonoccupants 8 1 6 1 5 1 9 1 7 1 Total Nonoccupants 183 17 146 15 150 19 174 23 177 22 1,071 100 938 100 807 100 762 100 826 100 Person Type Occupants Large Truck Bus Other/Unknown Occupants Bicyclist and Other Cyclist Total Source: FARS. 21 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 1.8 Fatalities by Crash Type Crash Type 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Total Fatalities (All Crashes) 1,071 938 807 762 826 615 558 506 483 490 98 98 66 64 77 Involving Speeding 452 389 283 245 232 Involving a Rollover 413 356 276 260 251 Involving a Roadway Departure 506 425 345 279 310 Involving an Intersection (or Intersection-Related) 269 234 165 175 203 Single Vehicle Involving a Large Truck Source: ADOT: Arizona Crash Facts, 2012. Figure 1.14 Fatalities by County 2011 and 2012 Source: ADOT: Arizona Crash Facts, 2012. 22 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure 1.15 Crashes and Fatal Crashes by Day of Week 2012 Total Crashes Mon 2,783 Tue 2,889 Wed 2,867 Thu 2,805 Fri 3,228 Sat 2,939 Sun 11,775 Mon 47 43 Tue 43 13,333 Wed 43 13,252 Thu 13,036 14,763 Urban 57 50 52 70 Sat 7,172 5,000 49 51 30 Fri 9,835 2,509 0 Fatal Crashes 57 Sun 10,000 15,000 0 30 Rural Urban 82 67 60 90 Rural Source: ADOT: Arizona Crash Facts, 2012. Figure 1.16 Crashes and Fatal Crashes by Month 2012 Fatal Crashes 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 15 10 5 0 6,893 Total Crashes 6,943 7,535 6,737 7,028 6,930 5,987 7,569 7,662 9,000 7,441 6,671 8,000 7,000 5,770 6,000 5,000 4,000 1,588 1,625 1,754 1,629 1,677 1,583 1,637 1,665 1,600 1,683 1,719 1,850 3,000 2,000 1,000 Jan Feb Mar Apr Urban Fatal May Jun Rural Fatal Jul Aug Sep Urban Total Oct Nov Dec 0 Rural Total Source: ADOT: Arizona Crash Facts, 2012. 23 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 1.7 COORDINATION WITH THE STRATEGIC HIGHWAY SAFETY PLAN The GOHS Director is a member of the Executive Committee for the statewide Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP). The SHSP is required by Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century (MAP-21) and is currently being updated. The plan is data-driven and includes statewide goals, objectives, and emphasis areas. GOHS will continue to closely coordinate and play a leadership role in the update process. The Agency will use the HSP and its resources to support the behavioral areas included in the plan depending on the SHSP results. For example, the new SHSP could include impaired driving and occupant protection as emphasis areas. The FFY 2014 HSP includes strong programs in those areas, which will support SHSP implementation. 24 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 2.0 Highway Safety Performance Plan During the problem identification process, emphasis was given to assessing changes in severity over a five-year period to establish trend lines. While the HSP is a one-year plan, behavioral change takes time. A countermeasure instituted to address a particular traffic safety problem may not show measurable impact for several years or more. For this reason, the GOHS establishes performance targets that reflect incremental but important gains in safety. Measured over a series of years, these reductions in crashes and resulting injuries and fatalities add up to safer travel for everyone on Arizona’s roadways. Table 2.1 identifies the program areas, performance targets, and performance measures which are the focus of the GOHS HSP efforts for FFY 2014. The three national activity measures, are included, however no targets have been set for them. Arizona will report progress on the grant activity measures annually. 2.1 HIGHWAY SAFETY GOALS FOR FFY 2014 Table 2.1 Performance Targets and Measures Program Area Overall GOHS Program Area Goals Performance Targets Performance Measures To decrease traffic fatalities by 1.2 percent, from a 5-year average (2008-2012) of 830 to 820 in 2014. Number of traffic-related fatalities. To decrease the number of injuries from the 5-year average (2008-2012) of 51,314 to 49,557 in 2014. Number of traffic-related injuries. To reduce the fatality per 100 million Fatalities per 100 million VMT. VMT rate by 4.9 percent from a 5-year average (2007-2011) of 1.44 to 1.37 in 2014. Impaired Driving To decrease alcohol-impaired driving fatalities (those involving a legally intoxicated driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of 0.08 or higher) by 3.9 percent from the 2012 level of 281 to 270 in 2014. Occupant Protection To reduce the number of unrestrained Number of unrestrained vehicle vehicle occupant fatalities in all occupant fatalities in all seating seating positions by 1.5 percent from positions. the 5-year average (2008-2012) of 269 to 265 in 2014. Number of fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of 0.08 percent or higher. 25 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Program Area Performance Targets To increase the statewide safety belt use rate for front seat occupants in passenger vehicles by 1.8 percent from the 5-year average of 81.5 percent to 83.1 percent in 2014. Performance Measures Percent of front seat vehicle occupants who are observed using safety belts. Speed To decrease the number of speeding- Number of speeding-related fatalities. related fatalities by 7.9 percent from the 5-year average (2008-2012) of 303 to 279 in 2014. Young Drivers To decrease the number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes by 11.1 percent from a 5-year average (2008-2012) of 108 to 96 in 2014. Motorcycles To decrease the number of motorcycle Number of motorcycle fatalities. fatalities slightly from the 2012 level of 139 to 136 in 2014. Number of drivers age 20 or younger involved in fatal crashes. To maintain the number of unhelmeted Number of unhelmeted motorcycle motorcycle fatalities at the 5-year fatalities. average (2008-2012) of 65 in 2014. Pedestrians Source: Arizona GOHS. 26 To decrease the number of crash fatalities among pedestrians from the 5-year average (2008-2012) of 133 to 131 in 2014. Number of pedestrian fatalities. State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.0 Highway Safety Strategies and Projects The Arizona Highway Safety Plan (HSP) commences October 1, 2013 and ends September 30, 2014. It is a flexible working document that can be revised to accommodate necessary changes to existing programs, as well as to introduce new programs. It contains a statewide overview and detailed summaries of traffic safety data, as well as program and project descriptions and budgets for the allocation of available funding. Funding for FY 2014 is estimated based on allocated amounts from prior years plus carry forward funding. The amounts listed with each project are estimates as of the submission date for this Highway Safety Plan. For FY 2014, GOHS is utilizing carry forward Section 410 High Fatality funding for some projects. As before, additional carry forward funding will be utilized to fund projects as the need arises. Carry forward funding will fund Section 402 grants until all FY 2013 funds are expended and new Section 402 funding is received. In addition, at least some of the Section 164 funding received in June 2013 will be reprogrammed at the appropriate time in FFY 2014. Finally, GOHS receives funding from the DUI Abatement Fund. These funds are not programmed through the HSP and are addressed separately in Appendix A. The GOHS philosophy and commitment “Grants for Performance”; in other words, we treat every taxpayer dollar granted to law enforcement agencies, nonprofits, fire districts, and city and county transportation departments with respect. All funds are devoted to improving safety on our roadways, and all grantees are required to report their progress and expenditures in a timely manner, in addition to quarterly and final reports of cost incurred. Our monitoring process is designed fulfill our commitment to the public we serve and ensure state and Federal compliance with statutes, rules, and guidelines. Program Overview The number one predictor of traffic crashes is the amount of travel a state’s citizens experience. The more we travel, the more we are exposed to the possibility of crash involvement. Between 2006 and 2011, Arizona was among the states hardest hit by a severe recession and an increase in fuel prices. Exemplary law enforcement, training, education, and public awareness programs, together with the troubled economy, resulted in the achievement of dramatic reductions in fatal and serious injury crashes. Arizona’s economy has begun to stabilize and improve since the 2007 recession. In 2010, Arizona realized the beginning of a recovery, which resulted in more jobs, increased home values, and increased economic activity. With a strengthened economy and lower fuel prices, our citizens bought new vehicles and motorcycles. They 27 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 traveled more often and for longer distances. As might be expected, congestion increased on our highways, i.e., increased exposure, and crashes, fatalities and injuries began to increase. During calendar year 2012, the numbers dipped slightly compared to 2011; yet the 823 fatalities that occurred in 2012 remain far higher than before, e.g., 709 fatalities in 2009 and 695 fatalities in 2010. On the other hand, the 2012 statistics remain far better than 2006 when Arizona recorded a record 1,301 fatalities. The following sections provide details on the program areas, goals, performance measures, strategies, task or project descriptions, and funding levels and sources. Multiple projects are included under most strategy to provide consistency with the Arizona accounting system. Therefore, a summary budget is included at the end of each section. The emphasis areas in Arizona’s FY 2014 HSP include impaired driving, occupant protection, speeding and aggressive driving, motorcycles, traffic records, accident investigation, and planning and administration. GOHS used Countermeasures That Work: A Highway Safety Countermeasure Guide for State Highway Safety Offices, Seventh Edition, 2013 (CTW) as a reference to aid in the selection of effective, evidence-based countermeasure strategies for the FFY 2014 HSP program areas. Citations referencing CTW provide the chapter and the section number (e.g., CTW, Chapter 2, Section 2.1). The citations are identified in the program/project descriptions and denote the effectiveness of the related countermeasure strategy where appropriate. Note: the effectiveness of GOHS administrative and management functions and activities is not evaluated or referenced. The seventh edition of CTW can found on the NHTSA web site at: http://www.nhtsa.gov/ staticfiles/nti/pdf/811727.pdf. 28 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.1 IMPAIRED DRIVING PROGRAM OVERVIEW Drivers and pedestrians impaired by alcohol and both legal and illegal drugs continue to be a challenge in Arizona. Reducing the number of alcohol-related fatalities, and injuries occurring on the highways remains a top safety focus area for Arizona. According to the NHTSA Fatality Analysis and Reporting System (FARS), in 2011, 215 fatalities involving at least one driver with a BAC of 0.08 percent or greater occurred. This represents a 4.37 percent increase from 2010. These fatalities accounted for 26.06 percent of all traffic-related fatalities in 2011. According to the Arizona Crash Records System, Arizona experienced almost 3,660 moderate to major injuries as a result of alcohol-related crashes in the same year. However, the research shows sustained, long-term, highly visible enforcement coupled with effective education programs reduces impaired driving crashes and fatalities. Arizona’s program has resulted in reduced impaired driving fatalities and injuries. Arizona has some of the toughest impaired driving laws in the country. The three-year average for impaired driving arrests was 9,130 from 2006 to 2008. This increased to an average of 21,689 during the following three years (2009-2011), which represents a 138 percent increase. Arizona is experiencing an alarming increase in arrests stemming from drug impaired driving. Prescription drug abuse is an epidemic, and “medical marijuana” is legal. As drugged driving has become more prevalent in Arizona arrests have increased dramatically, from about 700 in 2008 to over 4,000 in 2012. In 2012, Arizona law enforcement agencies made over 820,000 traffic Arizona is a national leader in drugged driving enforcement. stops and 30,000 DUI Here, an Arizona DPS Officer is preparing to draw blood arrests. This increase is from someone suspected of driving while under the influence of drugs. most likely due to the focus on drugged driving recognition (DRE) training for law enforcement. The State has a cadre of superbly trained officers in alcohol- and drug-impaired driver detection, but the challenges continue. Most law enforcement training in drugged driving recognition is through the advanced roadside impaired driving enforcement (ARIDE) course. This course is targeted to NHTSA SFST-certified officers. 29 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.1 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal To decrease alcohol-impaired driving fatalities (those involving a legally intoxicated driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of 0.08 or higher) by 2.5 percent from the five-year average (2008-2012) of 236 to 230 in 2014. Performance Measure Number of fatalities involving a driver or motorcycle operator with a BAC of 0.08 percent or higher. Strategies To combat the prevalence of impaired driving, GOHS devotes significant resources to overtime enforcement, equipment, and training for law enforcement officers statewide. Arizona’s impaired driving program utilizes enforcement, education, training, and public awareness to reduce the number of fatalities and injuries resulting from alcohol- and drug-impaired collisions. The GOHS will pursue the following strategies in FFY 2014 to reduced impaired driving on our roadways. 1. DUI enforcement program; 2. Funding for equipment and supplies; 3. Training; 4. Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor; and 5. Public awareness activities. GOHS will continue to fund these proven effective strategies to reduce the number of alcohol and drug driving-related fatalities by increasing the number of DUI arrests, training law enforcement on effective tools and techniques, and regularly informing the public about the danger associated impaired driving and the threat of arrest for those who break the laws. For an overview of Arizona DUI Enforcement Statistics from 2003 through 2012, see Figure B.4 in Appendix B. Programs and Projects Project Title: DUI Enforcement Program Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: Arizona’s DUI enforcement program includes parallel enforcement activities: 1) year-long sustained enforcement efforts and 2) periodic enhanced enforcement campaigns, such as the Holiday DUI Task Force enforcement efforts (see Figure B.5 for a summary of the East Valley Holiday DUI Task Force enforcement results). Arizona’s DUI Enforcement Program mobilizes enforcement efforts where a high frequency of fatal and/or serious injury impaired driving collisions occur. GOHS requires each agency receiving DUI enforcement funds to conduct educational and public awareness campaigns in their respective communities. This programs funds 62 agencies. 30 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Budget: $1,865,551.13 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 1, Sections 2.1, and 2.2 Table 3.2 Project Number Impaired Driving Enforcement Program Agency Amount Source 2014-AL-001 Cochise County Sheriff’s Office $40,000.00 402 2014-AL-002 La Paz County Sheriff’s Office $35,000.00 402 2014-AL-003 Sierra Vista Police Department $31,000.00 402 2014-AL-004 Marana Police Department $30,000.00 402 2014-AL-005 Prescott Police Department $27,000.00 402 2014-AL-006 Oro Valley Police Department $25,000.00 402 2014-AL-007 Prescott Valley Police Department $25,000.00 402 2014-AL-008 Douglas Police Department $20,000.00 402 2014-AL-009 Flagstaff Police Department $18,000.00 402 2014-AL-010 Flagstaff Police Department $18,000.00 402 2014-AL-011 Maricopa Police Department $18,000.00 402 2014-AL-012 University of Arizona Police Department $17,000.00 402 2014-AL-013 Thatcher Police Department $16,000.00 402 2014-AL-014 Arizona State University $15,477.00 402 2014-AL-015 Yuma County Sheriff’s Office $15,000.00 402 2014-AL-016 Pima County Community College Public Safety $15,000.00 402 2014-AL-017 Coolidge Police Department $15,059.00 402 2014-AL-018 Cottonwood Police Department $13,000.00 402 2014-AL-019 Mohave County Sheriff’s Office $12,000.00 402 2014-AL-020 Nogales Police Department $12,000.00 402 2014-AL-021 Tolleson Police Department $12,000.00 402 2014-AL-022 Navajo County Sheriff’s Office $10,000.00 402 2014-AL-023 El Mirage Police Department $10,000.00 402 2014-AL-024 Globe Police Department $8,836.00 402 2014-AL-025 Phoenix Fire Department $8,000.00 402 2014-AL-026 Sahuarita Police Department $8,000.00 402 2014-AL-027 Snowflake-Taylor Police Department $8,000.00 402 2014-AL-028 Springerville Police Department $8,000.00 402 2014-AL-029 Clifton Police Department $7,500.00 402 2014-AL-030 St. Johns Police Department $7,000.00 402 31 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Number Amount Source 2014-AL-031 Greenlee County Sheriff’s Office $6,000.00 402 2014-AL-032 Safford Police Department $6,957.13 402 2014-AL-033 Wickenburg Police Department $5,000.00 402 2014-AL-034 Pinetop-Lakeside Police Department $4,000.00 402 2014-AL-035 Jerome Police Department $2,000.00 402 2014-AL-036 Williams Police Department $1,750.00 402 2014-410-001 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office $180,000.00 410 2014-410-002 Arizona Department of Public Safety $121,837.00 410 2014-410-003 Mesa Police Department $110,000.00 410 2014-410-004 Pima County Sheriff’s Office $100,000.00 410 2014-410-005 Phoenix Police Department $82,500.00 410 2014-410-006 Tucson Police Department $80,000.00 410 2014-410-007 Pinal County Sheriff’s Office $60,000.00 410 2014-410-008 Scottsdale Police Department $60,000.00 410 2014-410-009 Gilbert Police Department $50,000.00 410 2014-410-010 Glendale Police Department $50,000.00 410 2014-410-011 Phoenix Police Department $55,000.00 410 2014-410-012 Tempe Police Department $50,000.00 410 2014-410-013 Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community $42,000.00 410 2014-410-014 Chandler Police Department $40,000.00 410 2014-410-015 Peoria Police Department $40,000.00 410 2014-410-016 Arizona Department of Liquor Licenses and Control $30,000.00 410 2014-410-017 Buckeye Police Department $30,000.00 410 2014-410-018 Surprise Police Department $30,000.00 410 2014-410-019 Kingman Police Department $29,135.00 410 2014-410-020 Casa Grande Police Department $20,000.00 410 2014-410-021 Goodyear Police Department $20,000.00 410 2014-410-022 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office $20,000.00 410 2014-410-023 Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office $16,500.00 410 2014-410-024 Gila River Indian Community Police Department $10,000.00 410 2014-410-025 Camp Verde Marshall’s Office $8,000.00 410 Total 32 Agency $1,865,551.13 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Impaired Driving Enforcement Equipment Program Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS provides funding for equipment that supports and enhances impaired driving enforcement efforts. The equipment purchased includes Portable Breath Testing Devices (PBT), phlebotomy supplies, PBT and Intoxilyzer mouthpieces, drug testing kits, urine and blood kits, and gas cylinders used to calibrate PBTs, Intoxilyzers, and Livescan Instruments (Figure B.6 in Appendix B presents 2012 month-by-month blood alcohol, blood drug, and blood urine case statistics for Mesa, Arizona). PBTs are handheld instruments used in the field by law enforcement officers to indicate the presence of alcohol in suspected alcohol/drug impaired drivers and underage alcohol offenders. Livescan Instruments take electronic fingerprints, provide for immediate comparison to check DUI suspects for prior arrests, and assist officers in positive suspect identification. Twenty enforcement agencies will receive funding for equipment under this program. Budget: $421,035.89 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 1, Section 2.3 Table 3.3 Project Number Impaired Driving Enforcement Equipment Program Agency Amount Source 2014-AL-037 Yuma County Sheriff’s Office $27,000.00 402 2014-AL-038 Oro Valley Police Department $24,000.00 402 2014-AL-039 Navajo County Sheriff’s Office $8,665.00 402 2014-AL-040 NAU Police Department $7,271.00 402 2014-AL-041 Cottonwood Police Department $3,275.00 402 2014-AL-042 Arizona State University Police Department $2,490.00 402 2014-AL-043 Greenlee County Sheriff’s Office $1,314.89 402 2014-AL-044 Clifton Police Department $6,367.00 402 2014-AL-045 Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office $500.00 402 2014-410-026 Mesa Police Department $127,500.00 410 2014-410-027 Pima County Sheriff’s Office $56,879.00 410 2014-410-028 Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community $54,000.00 410 2014-410-029 Apache County Sheriff’s Office $34,919.00 410 2014-410-030 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office $43,976.00 410 2014-410-031 Tucson Police Department $7,000.00 410 2014-410-032 Chandler Police Department $14,743.00 410 2014-410-033 Gila River Pima Maricopa Indian Community $1,136.00 410 Total $421,035.89 33 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Training Program Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description:. GOHS devotes significant resources toward the training of officers in areas such as Standardized Field Sobriety Test (SFST) Drug Recognition Expert (DRE) Horizontal Gaze Nystagmus (HGN) DUI report writing and testimony, law enforcement phlebotomy, Advanced Roadside Impaired Driving Enforcement (ARIDE), and Drug Impairment Training for Educational Professionals (DITEP). As a result, Arizona continues to be a national leader in the Drug Recognition Experts (DRE) program. Arizona’s robust DRE Certification Night program has proven to be a successful consequently; Arizona provides training to law enforcement officials from other states and countries. Through FFY 2012, GOHS funded 94 DRE certification nights hosted by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office for law enforcement officials from 15 other states, as well as two new DREs from Hong Kong with approximately 1,423 urine samples collected from subjects and more than 2,800 DRE training evaluations. During the last fiscal year, GOHS provided more than $150,000 in support of law enforcement training programs, including support for: travel reimbursement, training, books, materials and supplies, conference speakers in support of special training knowledge, and conference registration to provide necessary updates to the knowledge of Arizona’s DREs, as well as training for Law Enforcement Phlebotomists are all covered by GOHS. The increase in drugged driving arrests is most likely due to the focus on drugged driving recognition (DRE) training for law Arizona GOHS informational flyer. enforcement. DUI arrests increased more than 480 percent since 2008. The majority of law enforcement training in drugged driving recognition is through the advanced roadside impaired driving enforcement (ARIDE) course. This course targets NHTSA SFST certified officers. Approximately 1,145 law enforcement officers in Arizona have received ARIDE training since 2010. GOHS also conducts training for prosecutors and judges on DUI law issues through the Arizona Prosecuting Attorney’s Advisory Council (“APAAC”) and the Arizona Supreme Court. Budget: $194,800.00 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 1, Section 7.1 34 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.4 Impaired Driving Training Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-AL-516 GOHS – Judges Conference $30,000 402 2014-AL-511 GOHS – Lifesavers Conference $10,000 402 2014-410-500 GOHS – DRE/SFST Support $100,000 410 2013-410-501 GOHS – Phlebotomy $50,000 410 2014-410-034 Chandler Police Department Criminalist Training $4,800 410 Total $194,800 Project Title: Prosecutor Traffic Safety Resource Project Number: 2014-410-035 Description: Arizona’s Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor (TSRP) is housed in the City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office. The TSRP assists prosecutors statewide in the adjudication of impaired driving cases. The TSRP focuses on two goals: 1) increase the visibility of traffic safety cases with prosecutors and prosecutors’ visibility with the traffic safety community and 2) increase the confidence of prosecutors in the Arizona GOHS advertisement. courtroom. Funding is provided for personnel services, employee-related expenses, materials and supplies, and travel. (Note: Additional funding totaling $111,438.50, is provided by the Arizona DUI Abatement Council.) Budget: $111,438.50 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 1, Section 3 Table 3.5 Project Number 2014-410-035 Total Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor Program Agency City of Phoenix Prosecutor’s Office Amount Source $111,438.50 410 $111,438.50 35 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Impaired Driving Paid and Earned Media Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: The GOHS Director conducts press conferences and frequent media interviews in English and Spanish throughout the year and during Holiday enforcement campaigns. The event is widely covered by local TV, radio, and print media. GOHS’ on-line DUI reporting system and press releases during planned enforcement events are distributed daily to the media with updated impaired driving statistics from the previous evening’s activity and prior events. These releases provide constant news reports on DUI arrests and a plea to the public to reduce these numbers. GOHS also conducts an annual survey to track public perception and behavior with respect to impaired driving, occupant protection, and speeding. Earned media is supplemented by targeted paid media efforts. Targeted media efforts include the following activities: • Law enforcement agencies and fire departments conduct “Mock Crashes” to educate high school students about the risks associated with underage alcohol consumption; • SADD implements programs to education high school students on the dangers of impaired driving; • MADD’s court monitoring programs informs GOHS, the TSRP, and others about prosecution and adjudication practices; • GOHS develops, prints, and distributes public information and education materials to promote public awareness of and compliance with Arizona’s DUI laws; • GOHS “Public Safety Days” at the Arizona State Fair provide the public with information and education about Arizona DUI laws and general traffic safety issues; and • GOHS maintains a storage unit for DUI public information and education materials to ensure they are available when needed. Budget: $365,000.00 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 1, Sections 3.3, 5.2, and 6.5 Table 3.6 Impaired Driving Awareness Program Project Number 36 Agency Amount Source 2014-AL-046 Arizona SADD $50,000 402 2014-AL-047 MADD $50,000 402 2014-410-523 GOHS – Mock Crash $15,000 410 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-AL-506 GOHS – Alcohol Survey $10,000 402 2014-AL-500 GOHS – Public Safety Days $20,000 402 2014-AL-504 GOHS – PI&E $15,000 402 2014-AL-514 GOHS – Storage Unit $5,000 402 2014-410-524 GOHS – Paid Media $200,000 410 Total Table 3.7 $365,000 Impaired Driving Program Summary Budget Program Area DUI Enforcement Program Budget Amount $1,865,551.13 Impaired Driving Enforcement Equipment Program $421,035.89 Training Program $194,800.00 Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor $111,438.50 Impaired Driving Paid and Earned Media $365,000.00 Total $2,957,825.52 One of the 10 large DUI Processing Vehicles for blood and breath testing. There are another dozen smaller DUI Processing Vans around the State. 37 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.2 OCCUPANT PROTECTION PROGRAM OVERVIEW According to 2011 FARS data, unrestrained fatalities decreased 6.81 percent from 2010 (235) to 2011 (219). GOHS accomplishes its goal of improving safety belt and child safety seat use through strong, cohesive statewide enforcement and education campaigns under the banner of “Buckle Up Arizona…It’s the Law!” Arizona is a secondary safety belt violation state, but the law enforcement agencies implement a zero-tolerance policy when they encounter nonuse of safety belts coincidental to a stop for another traffic infraction. Occupant protection enforcement is a consistent component of all grant supported traffic safety projects. Enforcement is supported by extensive education and public awareness activities conducted by GOHS together with public and private sector partners. The activities include, safety belt and child safety seat classes and inspections, media awareness campaigns, and other events. Table 3.8 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal Performance Measure To reduce the number of unrestrained vehicle occupant fatalities in all seating positions by 1.5 percent from the five-year average (2008-2012) of 269 to 265 in 2014. Number of unrestrained vehicle occupant fatalities in all seating positions. To maintain the statewide safety belt use rate for front seat occupants in passenger vehicles at the three-year average of 82.30 in 2014. Percent of front seat vehicle occupants observed using safety belts. Strategies GOHS will implement six strategies for increasing the use of safety belts and child safety, including: 1. An annual safety belt and child safety seat use survey; 2. Rigorous law enforcement; 3. Equipment to support enforcement efforts; 4. Training and education; 5. Public awareness campaigns; and 6. Program management. Programs and Projects Project Title: Safety Belt and Child Safety Seat Survey Project Number: 2014-OP-515 Description: GOHS will contract to provide an annual safety belt and child safety seat survey. Budget: $58,800 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A 38 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.9 Safety Belt Survey Program Area 2014-OP-515 a Agency GOHS Annual Safety Belt Survey Amount Source $58,800a 402 This funding level may not be sufficient due to the changes in NHTSA’s methodology requirements. Project Title: Occupant Protection Law Enforcement Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task supports funding personnel services (overtime) and associated employee-related expenses for law enforcement agencies to enforce safety belt and child safety seat laws. Funding also is provided to fire departments to conduct child safety seat clinics within their jurisdictions. The Arizona enforcement community actively participates in the Buckle Up Arizona…It’s the Law/ Click it or Ticket (CIOT) and Child Passenger Safety campaigns and related events. Funding is provided to the top performing agencies as Booster and Child Safety Seat Distribution. measured by the number of citations written during these periods in 2013. GOHS will determine these agencies in early January 2014. Seventeen agencies receive funding for occupant protection enforcement. Twenty additional agencies participate in enforcement campaigns using their own funding mechanisms. Budget: $269,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 2, Section 2.1, 5.1, and 7.3 39 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.10 Occupant Protection Enforcement Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-OP-001 Phoenix Fire Department $45,000 402 2014-OP-002 Tucson Police Department $35,000 402 2014-OP-003 Chandler Police Department $30,000 402 2014-OP-004 Pima County Sheriff’s Office $30,000 402 2014-OP-005 Arizona Department of Public Safety $25,000 402 2014-OP-006 Tempe Police Department $25,000 402 2014-OP-007 Glendale Police Department $20,000 402 2014-OP-008 Chandler Fire Department $15,000 402 2014-OP-009 Chandler Fire Department $15,000 402 2014-OP-010 Florence Police Department $4,000 402 2014-OP-011 Phoenix Police Department $20,000 402 2014-OP-012 Sahuarita Police Department $5,000 402 2014-OP-509 Click It or Ticket (CIOT) Enforcement Wave $150,000 402 Total $269,000 Project Title: Equipment and Child Safety and Booster Seats Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This program provides equipment and child safety seats to support enforcement and child safety seat fitting stations to eight agencies. Budget: $39,718 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 2, Section 7.2 Table 3.11 Occupant Protection Equipment Program Project Number 2014-OP-013 Maricopa Integrated Health System 2014-OP-014 Amount Source $15,060 402 Apache County Public Health Services $7,454 402 2014-OP-015 Coconino County Public Health Services District $7,000 402 2014-OP-016 Sedona Fire District $3,098 402 2014-OP-017 Chandler Fire District $3,007 402 2014-OP-018 Florence Police Department $2,500 402 2014-OP-019 Payson Police Department $1,599 402 Total 40 Agency $39,718 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Training and Education Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS facilitates the statewide Children are Priceless Passengers (CAPP) program. The program is open to the general public, but is focused on child passenger safety law violators. It provides an opportunity for education on the proper installation and use of child safety seats. CAPP operates in 15 locations and is expanding to additional locations in FY 2014. GOHS also sponsors child safety seat certification classes in three geographic areas across the State in proximity to individuals who want to become certified technicians. GOHS supports “Public Safety Days” at the Arizona State Fair to provide the public information and education about Arizona occupant protection laws and general traffic safety issues. A storage unit is maintained to ensure materials are readily available when needed. Budget: $97,500 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 2, Sections 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, 6.2, and 7.2 Table 3.12 Occupant Protection Training Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-OP-503 GOHS – CAPP Support $50,000 402 2014-OP-501 GOHS – Public Safety Days $20,000 402 2014-OP-505 GOHS – PI&E $12,500 402 2014-OP-507 GOHS – Storage Unit $5,000 402 2014-OP-510 Lifesaver Conference $10,000 402 Total $97,500 Project Title: Occupant Protection Materials and Supplies Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task provides funding to agencies to develop, print, and distribute occupant protection public information materials and supplies. Budget: $29,012 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 2, Sections 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, and 6.2 41 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.13 Occupant Protection Materials and Supplies Program Area Agency Amount Source 2014-OP-020 Tucson Medical Center $10,500 402 2014-OP-021 Verde Valley Fire District $7,110 402 2014-OP-022 Coconino County Public Health Services District $7,000 402 2014-OP-023 Apache County Public Health Services $4,402 402 Total $29,012 Project Title: Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Paid Media Project Number: Two project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task provides funding for the development and distribution of paid media campaigns (electronic, print, radio, and broadcast) to promote public awareness of and compliance with Arizona’s occupant protection, safety belt, and child safety seat laws. This task also will provide funding for paid media for the FFY 2014 Buckle Up Arizona…It’s the Law!/Click it or Ticket campaign. Budget: $70,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 2, Sections 3.1, 3.2, 6.1, and 6.2 Table 3.14 Occupant Protection Awareness Program Program Area Agency Amount Source 2014-OP-508 GOHS – CIOT Paid Media $40,000 402 2014-OP-517 GOHS – Media $30,000 402 Total $70,000 Project Title: Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Program Administration Project Number: 2014-OP-300 Description: GOHS personnel will administer and manage 402 Occupant Protection programs. Functions include writing, managing, and monitoring grants and contracts. GOHS personnel coordinate the activities and tasks outlined in the Highway Safety Plan and provide status reports and updates on project activity to the GOHS Director and others as required. GOHS personnel monitor project activity, prepare and maintain project documentation, and evaluate task accomplishments for their grant portfolio. Budget: $37,502 42 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.15 Occupant Protection Program Administration Program Area Agency 2014-OP-300 Table 3.16 GOHS Program Administration Amount Source $37,502 402 Occupant Protection Program Summary Budget Program Area GOHS Annual Safety Belt Survey Budget Amount $58,800 Click It or Ticket (CIOT) Enforcement Wave $150,000 Occupant Protection Law Enforcement $269,000 Equipment and Child Safety Seats $39,718 Training and Education $97,500 Occupant Protection Materials and Supplies $29,012 Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Paid Media $70,000 GOHS Program Administration $37,502 Total $751,532 43 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.3 SPEEDING, AGGRESSIVE DRIVING, AND RED LIGHT RUNNING PROGRAM OVERVIEW Speeding is the number one contributing factor in the State’s fatal crashes. According to ADOT and FARS data, in 2011 294 speed-related fatalities occurred, which constitutes a 12.22 percent increase from 2010. Speeding-related fatalities make up 35.64 percent of all traffic fatalities; however, the number is down from 2006 (584), which likely is due to fewer vehicle miles traveled and stronger law enforcement. Throughout the year, the public hears about the number of persons arrested for impaired driving and wonders about the danger on our streets and highways posed by these dangerous drivers, but the public does not seem to perceive the danger posed by speeders. Countless tragedies are caused by excessive speed crashes, which injure and kill innocent people. Arizona’s wide thoroughfares are conducive to driving far in excess of the posted speed limit, changing lanes, tailgating, and passing dangerously on the daily commute. Some drivers ignore the most important rules of safe driving, which are common sense and courtesy. Law enforcement officers are aided by strong statutes governing speeding and aggressive driving. Arizona has a “Double Fine” program to reduce persistent speeding and aggressive driving violations in construction zones. The program provides for a driver license suspension when eight or more points are accumulated within a 12-month period. The “Double Fine” program also applies to speeding in excess of the posted speed limit in construction zones when workers are present. Enforcement deters speeders, but adjudication by prosecutors and the courts also is essential. Posted speed limits are not a suggestion; they are the law. Reasonable and prudent speeds require drivers to realize the dangers posed to themselves and others while speeding. Arizona also aggressively prosecutes and adjudicates red light violators. GOHS has funded an effective program with the Phoenix Police Department to reduce red light running (Brake on Yellow: Stop on Red). In addition to providing overtime for Selective Traffic Enforcement (STEP), GOHS funds laser and radar guns, speed trailers, and aggressive driving vehicles for law enforcement agencies. Table 3.17 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal To decrease the number of speeding-related fatalities by 7.9 percent from the five-year average (2008-2012) of 303 to 279 in 2014. 44 Performance Measure Number of speeding-related fatalities. State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Strategies GOHS supports several strategies to reduce speeding, aggressive driving, and red light running. They include: 1. Law enforcement overtime; 2. Equipment purchases; 3. Materials and support for public information and media campaigns; 4. Training for project and program managers (Lifesavers Conference); 5. An annual public opinion survey; and 6. Program management support. Programs and Projects Project Title: Law Enforcement Overtime Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS provides support for Selective Traffic Enforcement Programs (STEP), which are sustained traffic enforcement campaigns conducted by law enforcement agencies throughout the year. Participating law enforcement agencies enforce speed, aggressive driving, red light running, and DUI laws. Law enforcement funding is provided to: a) agencies with a proven track record of aggressively enforcing Arizona’s traffic laws; b) agencies with a high number of fatalities resulting from speeding or aggressive driving; and c) agencies implementing unique speed management and aggressive driving enforcement programs. This program provides support to 37 law enforcement agencies. Budget: $754,763 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 3, Section 2.2 Table 3.18 Program Area Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Enforcement Program Agency Amount Source $153,072 402 2014-PT-001 Arizona Department of Public Safety 2014-PT-002 Tucson Police Department $70,000 402 2014-PT-003 Tempe Police Department $65,000 402 2014-PT-004 Mesa Police Department $50,000 402 2014-PT-005 Gilbert Police Department $40,000 402 2014-PT-006 Phoenix Police Department $40,000 402 2014-PT-007 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office $25,000 402 45 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Program Area Amount Source 2014-PT-008 Pima County Sheriff’s Office $25,000 402 2014-PT-009 Pinal County Sheriff’s Office $25,000 402 2014-PT-010 Yuma County Sheriff’s Office $25,000 402 2014-PT-011 Glendale Police Department $20,000 402 2014-PT-012 Marana Police Department $20,000 402 2014-PT-013 Peoria Police Department $17,611 402 2014-PT-014 Sedona Police Department $15,840 402 2014-PT-015 Mohave County Sheriff’s Office $12,000 402 2014-PT-016 Prescott Police Department $12,000 402 2014-PT-017 Santa Cruz County Sheriff’s Office $12,000 402 2014-PT-018 Navajo County Sheriff’s Office $10,000 402 2014-PT-019 Nogales Police Department $10,000 402 2014-PT-020 Prescott Valley Police Department $10,000 402 2014-PT-021 Safford Police Department $10,000 402 2014-PT-022 Yavapai County Sheriff’s Office $8,500 402 2014-PT-023 Quartzsite Police Department $8,000 402 2014-PT-024 Cottonwood Police Department $8,000 402 2014-PT-025 Florence Police Department $8,000 402 2014-PT-026 Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community $8,000 402 2014-PT-027 Springerville Police Department $8,000 402 2014-PT-028 St. Johns Police Department $7,000 402 2014-PT-029 Pinetop-Lakeside Police Department $6,000 402 2014-PT-030 Payson Police Department $5,000 402 2014-PT-031 Globe Police Department $4,000 402 2014-PT-032 Thatcher Police Department $4,000 402 2014-PT-033 Coolidge Police Department $3,104 402 2014-PT-034 Eagar Police Department $2,500 402 2014-PT-035 Kingman Police Department $2,270 402 2014-PT-036 Sahuarita Police Department $2,116 402 2014-PT-037 Williams Police Department $1,750 402 2014-PT-038 Jerome Police Department $1,000 402 Total 46 Agency $754,763 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Law Enforcement Equipment Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task will fund equipment, such as police package motorcycles, speed trailers, LASER and Radar guns and tint meters to aide in the enforcement of Arizona traffic laws. Equipment is provided to 26 law enforcement agencies. Budget: $435,687.18 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 3, Section 2.3 Table 3.19 Program Area Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Equipment Program Agency Amount Source 2014-PT-039 Arizona Department of Public Safety $64,324.50 402 2014-PT-040 Avondale Police Department $10,284.00 402 2014-PT-041 Glendale Police Department $60,311.05 402 2014-PT-042 Florence Police Department $23,591.40 402 2014-PT-043 Florence Police Department $9,973.00 402 2014-PT-044 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office $29,793.00 402 2014-PT-045 Tempe Police Department $24,972.00 402 2014-PT-046 Sierra Vista Police Department $23,857.00 402 2014-PT-047 Chandler Police Department $17,681.50 402 2014-PT-048 Phoenix Police Department $17,126.00 402 2014-PT-049 Casa Grande Police Department $16,435.00 402 2014-PT-050 Gilbert Police Department $10,284.00 402 2014-PT-051 Gilbert Police Department $6,455.23 402 2014-PT-052 Maricopa Police Department $13,956.00 402 2014-PT-053 Peoria Police Department $12,119.00 402 2014-PT-054 Bullhead City Police Department $10,335.00 402 2014-PT-055 El Mirage Police Department $10,066.00 402 2014-PT-056 Benson Police Department $8,334.00 402 2014-PT-057 Snowflake Taylor Police Department $6,744.00 402 2014-PT-058 Navajo County Sheriff’s Office $6,492.50 402 2014-PT-059 Coolidge Police Department $6,046.00 402 2014-PT-060 Glendale Police Department $5,000.00 402 2014-PT-061 Cottonwood Police Department $4,682.00 402 47 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Program Area Agency Amount Source 2014-PT-062 Payson Police Department $4,680.00 402 2014-PT-063 Camp Verde Marshall’s Office $4,500.00 402 2014-PT-064 Gila River Indian Community Police Department $3,249.00 402 2014-PT-065 Eagar Police Department $2,520.00 402 2014-PT-066 Santa Cruz Sheriff’s Office $2,500.00 402 2014-PT-067 Sahuarita Police Department $2,116.00 402 2014-PT-068 San Luis Police Department $17,260.00 402 Total $435,687.18 Project Title: Campaigns Materials and Support for Public Information and Media Project Number: Two project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This project provides funding for paid media and materials and supplies for use in public education and awareness campaigns on speeding and aggressive driving. Budget: $17,222 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 3, Sections 2.2 and 4.1 Table 3.20 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Awareness Program Program Area Agency 2014-PT-519 GOHS Paid Media 2014-PT-069 Surprise Police Department Total Amount Source $15,000 402 $2,222 402 $17,222 Project Title: Training for project and program staff at the annual Lifesavers Conference Project Number: 2014-PT-512 Description: GOHS will provide training support for project and program staff travel to attend the annual Lifesavers Conference Budget: $10,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A 48 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.21 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Training Program Program Area Agency 2014-PT-512 GOHS – Lifesavers Conference Amount Source $10,000 402 Project Title: GOHS Annual Survey to Track Public Attitudes and Behaviors Project Number: 2014-PT-502 Description: GOHS conducts an annual survey to track public attitudes and behaviors associated with red light running and speeding. Budget: $12,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.22 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Survey Program Area Agency 2014-PT-502 GOHS Survey Total Amount Source $12,000 402 $12,000 Project Title: Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Program Administration Project Number: 2014-PT-300 Description GOHS personnel will administer and manage Selective Traffic Enforcement Programs. Functions include writing, managing, and monitoring grants and contracts. GOHS personnel coordinate the activities and tasks outlined in the Highway Safety Plan and provide status reports and updates on project activity to the GOHS Director and others as required. GOHS personnel monitor project activity, prepare and maintain project documentation, and evaluate task accomplishments for their grant portfolio. Budget: $143,055 Table 3.23 Program Area 2014-PT-300 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, and Red Light Running Program Administration Agency GOHS – Program Administration Amount Source $143,055 402 49 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.24 Speeding, Aggressive Driving, Red Light Running Program Summary Budget Program Area Law Enforcement Overtime $754,763.00 Law Enforcement Equipment $435,687.18 Materials and Support for Public Information and Media Campaigns $17,222.00 Lifesavers Conference $10,000.00 GOHS Annual Survey to Track Public Attitudes and Behaviors $12,000.00 Governor’s Office of Highway Safety Program Administration $143,055.00 Total 50 Budget Amount $1,372,727.18 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.4 MOTORCYCLE SAFETY PROGRAM OVERVIEW According to 2011 FARS data, motorcycle fatalities increased from 91 in 2010 to 136 in 2011 or 49.45 percent. GOHS provides funding for public awareness campaigns focused on motorcyclist behavior, as well as information for the driving public, e.g., reminders to watch for and be careful around motorcycles. The Arizona Motorcycle Safety Council (AMSAC) is established by statute and comprised of five members appointed by the Governor. It is housed at GOHS and provides input on the prevalent issues at the time of each meeting. Supplemental state funding is derived from fees paid at the time of motorcycle registration, which provides for paid media and other awareness activities, such as training and safety materials. According to FARS, motorcycle registrations increased 30.97 percent from 2010 (136,620) to 2011 (178,928); however, the fatality rate per 10,000 registered motorcycles involving riders with a BACs equal to or greater than 0.08 was reduced. This apparent anomaly is likely due to the increased number of registered motorcycles. Table 3.25 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal Performance Measure To decrease the number of motorcycle fatalities slightly from the 2012 level of 139 to 136 in 2014. Number of motorcycle fatalities. To maintain the number of unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities at the five-year average (2008-2012) of 65 in 2014. Number of unhelmeted motorcycle fatalities. Strategies GOHS will address motorcycle safety through the use of three strategies: 1. Track helmet use to measure the effectiveness of public information programs. 2. Enforce the laws governing motorcycle riding. 3. Raise public awareness, especially among passenger vehicle drivers, with respect to motorcycle safety. 51 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Programs and Projects Project Title: Motorcycle Helmet Survey Project Number: 2014-MC-520 Description: This task provides funding for GOHS’ annual survey measuring the use of motorcycle helmets. This survey is conducted as part of GOHS’ annual seatbelt survey. Budget: $11,200 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.26 Motorcycle Helmet Survey Project Number Agency 2014-MC-520 GOHS Annual Motorcycle Helmet Survey Amount Source $11,200 402 Project Title: Motorcycle Enforcement Project Number: Two project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: Conduct overtime enforcement patrols to ensure motorcyclists conform to the traffic laws. These agencies conduct targeted enforcement focusing on speeding, illegal lane changes, and licensing issues. Budget: $24,869 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 5, Section 2.1 Table 3.27 Project Number Motorcycle Enforcement Program Agency Amount Source 2014-MC-001 Phoenix Police Department $17,000 402 2014-2010-001 Peoria Police Department $7,869 2010 Total $24,869 Project Title: Motorcycle Safety Awareness Activities Project Number: One project number is included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS will develop and implement paid and earned awareness and media campaigns to promote public awareness of motorcycles and the need to be alert and watch for them. The campaigns also promote motorcyclist compliance with Arizona’s traffic laws. This project includes development of 52 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 brochures and other collateral materials, as well as print, electronic, and radio and broadcast media. Budget: $200,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: CTW, Chapter 5, Sections 4.1 and 4.2 Table 3.28 Motorcycle Awareness Program Project Number Agency 2014-2010-521 GOHS Paid Media Total Table 3.29 Amount Program Area $200,000 2010 $200,000 Motorcycle Safety Program Summary Budget Program Area Budget Amount Motorcycle Helmet Survey $11,200 Motorcycle Enforcement $24,869 Motorcycle Safety Awareness Activities $200,000 Total $236,069 53 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.5 TRAFFIC RECORDS PROGRAM OVERVIEW The goal of Arizona’s Traffic Records program is to ensure GOHS, ADOT, and the law enforcement community are able to access accurate and complete data. The data are critical for identifying problem areas in need of attention by GOHS and its partners. ADOT’s Motor Vehicle Division (MVD) collects, manages, and analyzes traffic records data for GOHS. With funding from GOHS, MVD, and the Traffic Records Coordinating Committee (TRCC) maintain the database on motor vehicle fatalities and injuries. During the past year, Arizona made great strides in data processing improvement, including the redesign of the Crash Report Form and the implementation of AZ TraCS (Traffic and Criminal Software) for data collection. The TRCC, at the direction of GOHS and ADOT, continue to work on a number of projects to enhance data collection. Strategies The strategies Arizona uses to address the traffic records program area include: 1. Equipment and materials purchases; and 2. Program management costs. Programs and Projects Project Title: Data Collection Equipment Project Number: Three project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: The purpose of this task is to provide Toughbook Tablets and e-Citation Devices to law enforcement agencies. Budget: $61,170.84 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.30 Program Area Agency Amount Source 2014-TR-001 Show Low Police Department $27,000.00 402 2014-TR-002 Avondale Police Department $19,572.84 402 2014-TR-003 Sahuarita Police Department $14,598.00 402 Total 54 Traffic Records Data Collection Equipment Program $61,170.84 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Title: Data Collection, Evaluation, and Analysis Project Number: 2014-408-001 Description: This task provides funding to the Arizona Department of Transportation’s Motor Vehicle Division to manage projects relating to the collection, evaluation and analysis of traffic data throughout the State of Arizona. Budget: $500,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.31 Traffic Records Data Collection, Evaluation, and Analysis Program Area Agency 2014-408-001 Arizona Department of Transportation MVD Amount Source $500,000 405c Project Title: GOHS Program Administration Project Number: One project number is included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS personnel administer and manage the 402 Traffic Records program. Functions include writing, managing, and monitoring grants and contracts. GOHS personnel coordinate the activities and tasks outlined in the Highway Safety Plan and provide status reports and updates on project activity to the GOHS Director and other parties as required. GOHS personnel monitor project activity, prepare and maintain project documentation and evaluate task accomplishments for grant portfolio. Funding supports personnel services, employee-related expenses, and other operating expenses for the GOHS grant manager and grant project coordinators. Budget: $5,591 Table 3.32 Traffic Records Program Administration Project Number 2014-TR-300 Table 3.33 Agency GOHS Program Administration Source $5,591 402 Traffic Records Program Summary Budget Program Area Data Collection Equipment Data Collection, Evaluation, and Analysis GOHS Program Administration Total Amount Budget Amount $61,170.84 $500,000.00 $5,591.00 $566,761.84 55 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.6 CRASH INVESTIGATION PROGRAM OVERVIEW GOHS provides funding to support three strategies related to the Vehicular Crime Unit investigation of crashes with potential for identifying criminal charges. 1. Enforcement overtime; 2. Equipment; and 3. Training. Programs and Projects Project Title: Enforcement Overtime for Crash Investigations Project Number: 2014-AI-001 Description: This project provides overtime funding to the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office for crash investigations. Budget: $20,000 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Enforcement Overtime Table 3.34 Crash Investigation Enforcement Program Project Number 2014-AI-001 Agency Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Total Amount $20,000 Source 402 $20,000 Project Title: Crash Investigation Equipment Project Number: Three project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This project supports equipment purchases for crash investigation units, such as, crash mapping and CDR software, AIMS units, Nikkon total station units, and one GPS unit. Budget: $26,925 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A 56 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.35 Crash Investigation Equipment Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-AI-002 Phoenix Police Department $14,855 402 2014-AI-003 Tucson Police Department $5,095 402 2014-AI-004 Coolidge Police Department $6,975 402 Total $26,925 Project Title: Crash Investigation Training Project Number: Three project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: programs. This project provides funding for crash investigation training Budget: $29,620 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.36 Crash Investigation Training Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-AI-005 Phoenix Police Department $6,000 402 2014-AI-006 Tucson Police Department $5,490 402 2014-AI-007 Coolidge Police Department $572 402 2014-AI-008 Tempe Police Department $17,558 402 Total Table 3.37 $29,620 Crash Investigation Program Summary Budget Program Area Budget Amount Enforcement Overtime for Crash Investigations $20,000 Crash Investigation Equipment $26,925 Crash Investigation Training $29,620 Total $76,545 57 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.7 EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES PROGRAM OVERVIEW GOHS provides funding to predominately to rural fire departments and fire districts throughout Arizona. Strategies The strategies utilized are twofold: 1. Crash extrication equipment purchases; and 2. Training on use of the equipment and training. Programs and Projects Project Title: Crash Extrication Equipment Purchases Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This project provides funding for crash extrication equipment purchases, including Power Units, Hydraulic Pumps, Combination tools (Jaws of Life), rescue struts, and cribbing. Budget: $98,303.35 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.38 Crash Extrication Equipment Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-EM-001 Arivaca Fire District $25,000.00 402 2014-EM-002 Yuma Fire Department $15,215.00 402 2014-EM-003 Flagstaff Fire District $13,006.50 402 2014-EM-004 Ponderosa Fire District $14,831.85 402 2014-EM-005 Sun Lakes Fire District $9,751.00 402 2014-EM-006 Highlands Fire District $4,694.00 402 2014-EM-007 Peeples Valley Fire District $9,581.00 402 2014-EM-008 Fry Fire District $6,224.00 402 Total $98,303.35 Project Title: Crash Extrication Training Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. 58 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Description: This project supports training on the proper use of the crash extrication equipment. Budget: $10,424.85 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.39 Crash Extrication Training Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-EM-009 Pinewood Fire District $4,990.00 402 2014-EM-010 Congress Fire District $1,566.00 402 2014-EM-011 Black Canyon Fire District $2,091.00 402 Total Table 3.40 $8,647.00 Emergency Medical Services Program Summary Budget Program Area Extrication Equipment Purchases Extrication Equipment Training Total Budget Amount $98,303.35 $8,647.00 $106,950.35 59 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.8 PEDESTRIAN AND BICYCLE SAFETY PROGRAM OVERVIEW GOHS provides support for a program to improve pedestrian and bicycle safety. Table 3.41 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal Performance Measure To decrease the number of crash fatalities among pedestrians from the five-year average (2008-2012) of 133 to 131 in 2014. Number of pedestrian fatalities. Strategies The four strategies supporting this program include: 3. Enforcement; 4. Equipment; 5. Education and awareness services; and 6. Signage to protect pedestrians and bicyclists. Programs and Projects Project Title: Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Enforcement Program Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS provides overtime funding for selected agencies representing cities with identified problems, such as speeding through school zones and crashes involving motor vehicles and pedestrians and bicycles. These agencies participate in “Wolf Pack” enforcement details within their communities to aggressively enforce school zone and pedestrian traffic laws. The Rio Rico Fire Districts provides community information on bicycle safety and distribute bicycle helmets. Budget: $103,270 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.42 Project Number 60 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Enforcement Program Agency Amount Source 2014-PS-001 Pima County Sheriff’s Office $25,000 402 2014-PS-002 Phoenix Police Department $27,000 402 2014-PS-003 Tucson Police Department $12,000 402 2014-PS-004 Yuma County Sheriff’s Office $12,000 402 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 2014-PS-005 Drexel Heights Fire District $2,975 402 2014-PS-006 Rio Rico Fire District $4,488 402 2014-PS-007 Phoenix Fire Department $7,000 402 2014-PS-008 Northern Arizona Police Department $5,891 402 2014-PS-009 Rio Rico Fire District $3,409 402 2014-PS-010 University of Arizona Police Department $3,507 402 Total $103,270 Project Title: Pedestrian and Bicycle Community Education and Awareness. Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: GOHS supports the purchase of bicycle helmets, bicycles, print and electronic media, and other materials for bicycle and pedestrian safety events throughout the state, such as bicycle rodeos. This project also provides funding to GOHS for the development of public education and awareness materials relating to pedestrian and bicycle safety. Budget: $39,691 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A Table 3.43 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Awareness Program Project Number Agency Amount Source 2014-PS-011 Phoenix Fire Department $11,860 402 2014-PS-012 Peoria Police Department $9,083 402 2014-PS-013 Maricopa Integrated Health System $4,950 402 2014-PS-014 Sahuarita Police Department $1,298 402 2014-PS-518 GOHS – PI&E $12,500 402 Total $39,691 Project Title: Roadway Safety Signs and Materials Project Number: Three project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task funds materials and supplies for school signs, bike to school helmets, reflective arm/leg banks, literature, pedestrian and bicycle safety electronic applications, and buckle up signs, bus and light rail transit wraps, and other roadway language signs. Budget: $60,240 Evidence of Effectiveness: N/A 61 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.44 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Roadway Signs and Materials Project Number Agency Source 2014-RS-001 Phoenix Street Transportation $47,500 402 2014-RS-002 Pima County Department of Transportation $12,740 402 Total $60,240 Table 3.45 Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Program Summary Budget Program Area Budget Amount Pedestrian and Bicycle Safety Enforcement Program $103,270 Pedestrian and Bicycle Community Education and Awareness $39,691 Roadway Safety Signs and Materials $60,240 Total 62 Amount $203,201 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.9 PLANNING AND ADMINISTRATION PROGRAM OVERVIEW The Program Administration and Planning and Administration (PA) program areas include those activities and costs necessary for the overall management and operations of the Arizona GOHS. The Director of the GOHS is responsible for Arizona’s Highway Safety Program and serves as the Governor’s Highway Safety Representative. Table 3.46 Performance Goals and Measures Performance Goal Performance Measure To efficiently and effectively manage Arizona’s Highway Safety Program Required program and financial deadlines Prepare GOHS 2014 Annual Report Submitted to Region 9 December 31, 2014 Closeout 2014 Highway Safety Program and move unexpended funds into 2015 Highway Safety Plan Submitted to Region 9 December 31, 2014 Strategies GOHS personnel will administer and manage all 402 and 405 programs. Functions include writing, managing, and monitoring grants and contracts. GOHS personnel coordinate the activities outlined in the Highway Safety Plan and provide status reports and updates on project activity to the GOHS Director and other parties as required. GOHS personnel monitor project activity, prepare and maintain project documentation and evaluate task accomplishments for their grant portfolio. Personnel also coordinate training as well as fiscally manage and audit funds. Funding will support personnel services, employee-related expenses, and other operating expenses for GOHS fiscal and project coordinators. Programs and Projects Project Title: Planning and Administration Project Number: Multiple project numbers are included under this strategy to provide consistency with GTS and the Arizona accounting system. Description: This task funds salaries, materials, supplies, etc. to support overall administration of GOHS and the Highway Safety Plan. Budget: $982,917 Table 3.49 shows the cost summary for GOHS program administration. 63 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table 3.47 Program Administration Cost Summary Project Number Amount Source $340,000 402-PA $16,672 402-AI 2014-PA-200 Planning and Administration 2014-AI-300 Accident Investigation 2014-AL-300 Impaired Driving $108,050 402-AL 2014-410-300 Impaired Driving and Arizona Impaired Driving Coordinator $111,000 410 2014-EM-300 Emergency Medical Services 2014-164-300 Section 164 2014-OP-300 $9,760 402-EM $190,967 164 Occupant Protection $37,502 402-OP 2014-PS-300 Pedestrian/Bicycle Safety $15,070 402-PS 2014-PT-300 Police Traffic Services $143,055 402-PT 2014-RS-300 Roadway Safety $5,250 402-RS 2014-TR-300 Traffic Records $5,591 402-TR Total 64 Program $982,917 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.10 NHTSA EQUIPMENT APPROVAL GOHS provides funding for equipment to support and enhance highway safety programs. The following tables list equipment purchases exceeding $5,000.00 from 405d and 402 funds. As equipment needs become apparent throughout a fiscal year, GOHS will request NHTSA’s approval for the purchases. Table 3.48 Project Number Equipment Program in Excess of $5,000.00 for NHTSA Approval Agency Equipment Amount Source 2014-410-028 Salt River Pima Maricopa Indian Community (2) Motorcycles with Police Package $54,000.00 410 2014-410-029 Apache County Sheriff’s Office (1) Motorcycle with Police Package $34,919.00 410 2014-410-032 Chandler Police Department Drager Drug Test Analyzer $5,236.00 410 2014-410-030 Maricopa County Sheriff’s Office Drager Drug Test Analyzer $5,236.00 410 2014-AL-037 Yuma County Sheriff’s Office (1) Motorcycle with Police Package $27,000.00 402-AL 2014-AL-038 Oro Valley Police Department (1) Motorcycle with Police Package $24,000.00 402-AL 2014-AI-002 Phoenix Police Department Collision Investigation Equipment $14,855.00 402-AI 2014-AI-004 Coolidge Police Department Crash Data Retrieval System $6,975.00 402-AI 2014-AI-003 Tucson Police Department Traffic Investigation Equipment Vericom Friction and Performance Computer Standardized Reconstructionist Package $5,095.00 402-AI 2014-EM-001 Arivaca Fire Department Crash Stabilization Equipment $25,000.00 402-EM 2014-EM-003 Flagstaff Fire Department Crash Extrication Equipment $13,006.50 402-EM 2014-EM-004 Ponderosa Fire District Crash Extrication Equipment $12,963.00 402-EM 2014-EM-002 Yuma Fire Department Crash Extrication Equipment $15,215.00 402-EM 2014-EM-005 Sun Lakes Fire District Crash Extrication Equipment $9,751.00 402-EM 2014-EM-007 Peeples Fire District Crash Extrication Equipment $6,581.00 402-EM 65 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Project Number Agency Equipment Source $6,224.00 402-EM 2014-EM-008 Fry Fire District Crash Extrication Equipment 2014-PT-046 Sierra Vista Police Department (1) Motorcycle with Police Package $23,857.00 402-PT 2014-PT-050 Gilbert Police Department (1) Speed Radar Trailer $10,284.00 402-PT 2014-PT-055 El Mirage Police Department (1) Mobile Digital Speed Trailer $10,066.00 402-PT 2014-PT-043 Florence Police Department (1) Speed Radar Trailer $9,973.00 402-PT 2014-PT-040 Avondale Police Department (1) Speed Enforcement Trailer $8,150.00 402-PT 2014-PT-041 Glendale Police Department Emergency Lighting for Aggressive Driving Vehicle $5,000.00 402-PT 2014-RS-002 Pima County Department of Transportation (2) Pole Mount Radar Speed Display Sign and Related Equipment $12,740.00 402-RS 2014-TR-002 Avondale Police Department (4) Handheld Electronic Citation unit $19,572.84 402-TR Total Sign created for the Waste Management Phoenix Open golf tournament. 66 Amount $365,699.34 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.11 PAID ADVERTISING GOHS captures a large amount of earned media through the distribution of public service announcements, media interviews, press conferences, and media alerts. Arizona also uses paid media to support the national mobilizations in impaired driving and occupant protection. In addition, GOHS provide funding for paid media in the speeding and aggressive driving and motorcycle safety program areas. The following table shows the amount and distribution of these funds. Table 3.49 Paid Advertising Summary Project Number Agency 2014-410-524 GOHS Paid Media 2014-OP-508 GOHS CIOT 2014-2010-521 GOHS Paid Media Total Amount Source $200,000 410 $40,000 402 $200,000 2010 $440,000 The Agency measures the effectiveness of these activities through a consultant service that tracks the number of commercial images produced by a campaign and reports on Gross Rating Points which show the frequency and value associated with individual radio and television station activity. Maricopa Police Department mock crash. 67 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3.12 164 TRANSFER FUNDS PROGRAM OVERVIEW GOHS currently is implementing a large §164 program submitted on April 4, 2013 and subsequently approved by NHTSA. The program supports comprehensive alcohol impaired driving enforcement efforts throughout Arizona. Specific funding items include overtime for high-visibility enforcement efforts, DUI saturation patrols, and checkpoints; employee-related expenses; equipment; materials; and program management. The §164 funds are supplemented by §410 HF and HV carry forward funds. A summary budget is presented in Table 3.50. Table 3.50 Transfer Funds Program Summary FFY 2013 HSP Expenditures – 164 Enforcement Program Program Area 164 Amount $5,189,296.81 GOHS Program Administration – 164 $190,966.68 GOHS Media – 164 $710,475.00 410 HF $181,737.00 410 HV $631,250.23 Total HSP 164/410 Funding $6,903,725.72 Note: Some agencies agreed to provide their own funding to supplement equipment purchases. The total law enforcement agency contribution is $160,317.00. The contract approval decisions came in early FFY 2013 but as of June 24, 2013 NHTSA has not released the funding into GTS; hence, it is unlikely all the funds will be expended by the end of the fiscal year, especially the equipment purchases. GOHS will revise and resubmit the contracts in November 2013 after FFY is closed out. Arizona missed out in enforcement of Alcohol DUI laws on holiday weekends like Cinco de Mayo, Memorial Day, and 4th of July. 68 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Judge Mike Reagan and Maricopa County Attorney Bill Montgomery at a DUI deployment event in Scottsdale. 69 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 4.0 Performance Report Table 4.1 shows Arizona’s progress in meeting the national core performance measures identified in the FFY 2013 HSP. The end date for each performance target, which is December 31, 2013, has been omitted from the figure below for conciseness of presentation. 71 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure 4.1 Progress in Meeting FFY 2013 Performance Targets Core Performance Measured FFY 2013 Performance Targets 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012a 5-Year Average 2013 Target 938 806 759 825 823 830 742 56,009 50,786 50,421 49,710 49,646 51,314 45,221 1.44 1.26 Outcome Measures Fatalities Decrease 7% from 798 (2009-2011 average) to 742 Serious Traffic Injuriesa Decrease 10% from 50,246 (2009-2011 average) to 45,221 Fatalities/100M VMT Decrease 5% from 1.33 (2009-2011 average) to 1.26 1.52 1.31 1.26 Unrestrained Passenger Vehicle Occupant Fatalities Decrease from 252 (2009-2011 average) to 232 330 248 235 219 313 269 232 Alcohol Impaired Driving Fatalities (BAC = 0.08%+) Decrease (no numerical target set) 262 218 206 215 281 236 – Speeding-Related Fatalities Decrease 10% from 253 (2009-2011 average) to 228 389 293 262 294 279 303 228 Total Motorcycle Fatalities Decrease 2% from 116 (2009-2011 average) to 114 141 121 91 136 139 126 114 Unhelmeted Motorcycle Fatalities Decrease 4% from 62 (2009-2011 average) to 60 68 66 50 73 66 65 60 Drivers Age 20 or Younger in Fatal Crashes Decrease 10% from 104 (2009-2011 average) to 94 153 95 79 116 97 108 94 Pedestrian Fatalities Decrease 8% from 139 (2009-2011 average) to 128 121 118 145 147 132 133 128 Increase 1% from 82.2% (2010-2012 average) to 83.2 79.9% 80.8% 81.8% 82.9% 82.2% 81.5% 83.2% Number of Seat Belt Citations Issued Target not required 1,132 3,323 5,409 21,828 28,778 12,094 n/a Number of Impaired Driving Arrests Made Target not required 10,409 14,154 19,353 31,561 30,548 21,205 n/a Number of Other Citations (including speed) Issuedb Target not required 43,846 73,600 99,833 331,269 349,703 179,650 n/a Behavior Measure Percent Observed Belt Use for Passenger Vehicles Activity Measures Sources: Fatality Analysis Reporting System (all 2008 through 2011 data except injuries); ADOT for traffic injury data and all 2012 data; GOHS Reporting System. Notes: a Five-Year b In Average is for 2008 through 2012, except for the fatality rate which is the 5-year average of years 2007 through 2011. 2012 there were 349,703 citations issued for speed and aggressive driving which includes, speed not reasonable or prudent, excessive speed, speed not right for conditions, and reckless driving while speeding or other citations issued for other moving violations like red light running. Arizona is continually improving the capture of arrest data and a portion of the recent increase in the number of citations is due a greater proportion of citations being recorded in the GOHS web site tracking system. 72 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 5.0 Cost Summary 73 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 74 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 75 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 6.0 State Certifications and Assurances APPENDIX A TO PART 1200 – CERTIFICATION AND ASSURANCES FOR HIGHWAY SAFETY GRANTS (23 U.S.C. CHAPTER 4) State: Arizona Fiscal Year: 2014 Each fiscal year the State must sign these Certifications and Assurances that it complies with all requirements including applicable Federal statutes and regulations that are in effect during the grant period. (Requirements that also apply to subrecipients are noted under the applicable caption.) In my capacity as the Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety, I hereby provide the following certifications and assurances: GENERAL REQUIREMENTS To the best of my personal knowledge, the information submitted in the Highway Safety Plan in support of the State’s application for Section 402 and Section 405 grants is accurate and complete. (Incomplete or incorrect information may result in the disapproval of the Highway Safety Plan.) The Governor is the responsible official for the administration of the State highway safety program through a State highway safety agency that has adequate powers and is suitably equipped and organized (as evidenced by appropriate oversight procedures governing such areas as procurement, financial administration, and the use, management, and disposition of equipment) to carry out the program. (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(A)) The State will comply with applicable statutes and regulations, including but not limited to: • • • 23 U.S.C. Chapter 4 – Highway Safety Act of 1966, as amended; 49 CFR Part 18 – Uniform Administrative Requirements for Grants and Cooperative Agreements to State and Local Governments; and 23 CFR Part 1200 – Uniform Procedures for State Highway Safety Grant Programs. 77 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 The State has submitted appropriate documentation for review to the single point of contact designated by the Governor to review Federal programs, as required by Executive Order 12372 (Intergovernmental Review of Federal Programs). FEDERAL FUNDING ACCOUNTABILITY AND TRANSPARENCY ACT (FFATA) The State will comply with FFATA guidance, OMB Guidance on FFATA Subward and Executive Compensation Reporting, August 27, 2010, (https://www.fsrs.gov/documents/OMB_Guidance_on_FFATA_Subaward_and_Executive_Co m pensation_Reporting_08272010.pdf) by reporting to FSRS.gov for each sub-grant awarded: • Name of the entity receiving the award; • Amount of the award; • Information on the award including transaction type, funding agency, the North • American Industry Classification System code or Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance number (where applicable), program source; • Location of the entity receiving the award and the primary location of performance under the award, including the city, State, congressional district, and country; and an award title descriptive of the purpose of each funding action; • A unique identifier (DUNS); • The names and total compensation of the five most highly compensated officers of the entity if: (i) the entity in the preceding fiscal year received— (I) 80 percent or more of its annual gross revenues in Federal awards; (II) $25,000,000 or more in annual gross revenues from Federal awards; and (ii) the public does not have access to information about the compensation of the senior executives of the entity through periodic reports filed under section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a), 78o(d)) or section 6104 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986; • Other relevant information specified by OMB guidance. NONDISCRIMINATION (applies to subrecipients as well as States) The State highway safety agency will comply with all Federal statutes and implementing regulations relating to nondiscrimination. These include but are not limited to: a) Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Pub. L. 88-352), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color or national origin (and 49 CFR Part 21); b) Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972, as amended (20 U.S.C. 1681-1683 and 1685-1686), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of sex; c) Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, as amended (29 U.S.C. 794), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (Pub. L. 101-336), as amended (42 U.S.C. 12101, et seq.), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of disabilities (and 49 CFR Part 27); d) the Age Discrimination Act of 1975, as amended (42 U.S.C. 6101-6107), which prohibits discrimination on the basis of age; e) the Civil Rights Restoration Act of 1987 (Pub. L. 100-259), which requires Federal-aid recipients and all subrecipients to prevent discrimination and ensure nondiscrimination in all of their programs and activities; f) the Drug 78 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Abuse Office and Treatment Act of 1972 (Pub. L. 92-255), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of drug abuse; g) the comprehensive Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism Prevention, Treatment and Rehabilitation Act of 1970 (Pub. L. 91-616), as amended, relating to nondiscrimination on the basis of alcohol abuse or alcoholism; h) Sections 523 and 527 of the Public Health Service Act of 1912, as amended (42 U.S.C. 290dd-3 and 290ee-3), relating to confidentiality of alcohol and drug abuse patient records; i) Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968, as amended (42 U.S.C. 3601, et seq.), relating to nondiscrimination in the sale, rental or financing of housing; j) any other nondiscrimination provisions in the specific statute(s) under which application for Federal assistance is being made; and (k) the requirements of any other nondiscrimination statute(s) which may apply to the application. THE DRUG-FREE WORKPLACE ACT OF 1988(41 USC 8103) The State will provide a drug-free workplace by: • • • • • Publishing a statement notifying employees that the unlawful manufacture, distribution, dispensing, possession or use of a controlled substance is prohibited in the grantee’s workplace and specifying the actions that will be taken against employees for violation of such prohibition; Establishing a drug-free awareness program to inform employees about: o The dangers of drug abuse in the workplace. o The grantee’s policy of maintaining a drug-free workplace. o Any available drug counseling, rehabilitation, and employee assistance programs. o The penalties that may be imposed upon employees for drug violations occurring in the workplace. o Making it a requirement that each employee engaged in the performance of the grant be given a copy of the statement required by paragraph (a). Notifying the employee in the statement required by paragraph a) that, as a condition of employment under the grant, the employee will – o Abide by the terms of the statement. o Notify the employer of any criminal drug statute conviction for a violation occurring in the workplace no later than five days after such conviction. Notifying the agency within ten days after receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2) from an employee or otherwise receiving actual notice of such conviction. Taking one of the following actions, within 30 days of receiving notice under subparagraph (d)(2), with respect to any employee who is so convicted – o Taking appropriate personnel action against such an employee, up to and including termination. o Requiring such employee to participate satisfactorily in a drug abuse assistance or rehabilitation program approved for such purposes by a Federal, State, or local health, law enforcement, or other appropriate agency. 79 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 • Making a good faith effort to continue to maintain a drug-free workplace through implementation of all of the paragraphs above. BUY AMERICA ACT (applies to subrecipients as well as States) The State will comply with the provisions of the Buy America Act (49 U.S.C. 5323(j)), which contains the following requirements: Only steel, iron and manufactured products produced in the United States may be purchased with Federal funds unless the Secretary of Transportation determines that such domestic purchases would be inconsistent with the public interest, that such materials are not reasonably available and of a satisfactory quality, or that inclusion of domestic materials will increase the cost of the overall project contract by more than 25 percent. Clear justification for the purchase of non-domestic items must be in the form of a waiver request submitted to and approved by the Secretary of Transportation. POLITICAL ACTIVITY (HATCH ACT) (applies to subrecipients as well as States) The State will comply with provisions of the Hatch Act (5 U.S.C. 1501-1508) which limits the political activities of employees whose principal employment activities are funded in whole or in part with Federal funds. CERTIFICATION REGARDING FEDERAL LOBBYING (applies to subrecipients as well as States) Certification for Contracts, Grants, Loans, and Cooperative Agreements The undersigned certifies, to the best of his or her knowledge and belief, that: 1. No Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid, by or on behalf of the undersigned, to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with the awarding of any Federal contract, the making of any Federal grant, the making of any Federal loan, the entering into of any cooperative agreement, and the extension, continuation, renewal, amendment, or modification of any Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement. 2. If any funds other than Federal appropriated funds have been paid or will be paid to any person for influencing or attempting to influence an officer or employee of any agency, a Member of Congress, an officer or employee of Congress, or an employee of a Member of Congress in connection with this Federal contract, grant, loan, or cooperative agreement, the undersigned shall complete and submit Standard Form-LLL, “Disclosure Form to Report Lobbying,” in accordance with its instructions. 80 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 3. The undersigned shall require that the language of this certification be included in the award documents for all sub-award at all tiers (including subcontracts, subgrants, and contracts under grant, loans, and cooperative agreements) and that all subrecipients shall certify and disclose accordingly. This certification is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was made or entered into. Submission of this certification is a prerequisite for making or entering into this transaction imposed by section 1352, title 31, U.S. Code. Any person who fails to file the required certification shall be subject to a civil penalty of not less than $10,000 and not more than $100,000 for each such failure. RESTRICTION ON STATE LOBBYING (applies to subrecipients as well as States) None of the funds under this program will be used for any activity specifically designed to urge or influence a State or local legislator to favor or oppose the adoption of any specific legislative proposal pending before any State or local legislative body. Such activities include both direct and indirect (e.g., “grassroots”) lobbying activities, with one exception. This does not preclude a State official whose salary is supported with NHTSA funds from engaging in direct communications with State or local legislative officials, in accordance with customary State practice, even if such communications urge legislative officials to favor or oppose the adoption of a specific pending legislative proposal. CERTIFICATION REGARDING DEBARMENT AND SUSPENSION (applies to subrecipients as well as States) Instructions for Primary Certification 1. By signing and submitting this proposal, the prospective primary participant is providing the certification set out below. 2. The inability of a person to provide the certification required below will not necessarily result in denial of participation in this covered transaction. The prospective participant shall submit an explanation of why it cannot provide the certification set out below. The certification or explanation will be considered in connection with the department or agency’s determination whether to enter into this transaction. However, failure of the prospective primary participant to furnish a certification or an explanation shall disqualify such person from participation in this transaction. 3. The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when the department or agency determined to enter into this transaction. If it is later determined that the prospective primary participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal Government, the department or agency may terminate this transaction for cause or default. 81 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 4. The prospective primary participant shall provide immediate written notice to the department or agency to which this proposal is submitted if at any time the prospective primary participant learns its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 5. The terms covered transaction, debarred, suspended, ineligible, lower tier covered transaction, participant, person, primary covered transaction, principal, proposal, and voluntarily excluded, as used in this clause, have the meaning set out in the Definitions and coverage sections of 49 CFR Part 29. You may contact the department or agency to which this proposal is being submitted for assistance in obtaining a copy of those regulations. 6. The prospective primary participant agrees by submitting this proposal that, should the proposed covered transaction be entered into, it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by the department or agency entering into this transaction. 7. The prospective primary participant further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include the clause titled “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion-Lower Tier Covered Transaction,” provided by the department or agency entering into this covered transaction, without modification, in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. 8. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency by which it determines the eligibility of its principals. Each participant may, but is not required to, check the list of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs. 9. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings. 10. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 6 of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal Government, the department or agency may terminate this transaction for cause or default. 82 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters-Primary Covered Transactions (1) The prospective primary participant certifies to the best of its knowledge and belief, that its principals: (a) Are not presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded by any Federal department or agency; (b) Have not within a three-year period preceding this proposal been convicted of or had a civil judgment rendered against them for commission of fraud or a criminal offense in connection with obtaining, attempting to obtain, or performing a public (Federal, State or local) transaction or contract under a public transaction; violation of Federal or State antitrust statutes or commission of embezzlement, theft, forgery, bribery, falsification or destruction of record, making false statements, or receiving stolen property (c) Are not presently indicted for or otherwise criminally or civilly charged by a governmental entity (Federal, State or Local) with commission of any of the offenses enumerated in paragraph (1)(b) of this certification; and (d) Have not within a three-year period preceding this application/proposal had one or more public transactions (Federal, State, or local) terminated for cause or default. (2) Where the prospective primary participant is unable to certify to any of the Statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. Instructions for Lower Tier Certification 1. By signing and submitting this proposal, the prospective lower tier participant is providing the certification set out below. 2. The certification in this clause is a material representation of fact upon which reliance was placed when this transaction was entered into. If it is later determined that the prospective lower tier participant knowingly rendered an erroneous certification, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment. 3. The prospective lower tier participant shall provide immediate written notice to the person to which this proposal is submitted if at any time the prospective lower tier participant learns that its certification was erroneous when submitted or has become erroneous by reason of changed circumstances. 4. The terms covered transaction, debarred, suspended, ineligible, lower tier covered transaction, participant, person, primary covered transaction, principal, proposal, and voluntarily excluded, as used in this clause, have the meanings set out in the Definition and Coverage sections of 49 CFR Part 29. You may contact the person to whom this proposal is submitted for assistance in obtaining a copy of those regulations. 83 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 5. The prospective lower tier participant agrees by submitting this proposal that, should the proposed covered transaction be entered into, it shall not knowingly enter into any lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this covered transaction, unless authorized by the department or agency with which this transaction originated. 6. The prospective lower tier participant further agrees by submitting this proposal that it will include the clause titled “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion – Lower Tier Covered Transaction,” without modification, in all lower tier covered transactions and in all solicitations for lower tier covered transactions. (See below) 7. A participant in a covered transaction may rely upon a certification of a prospective participant in a lower tier covered transaction that it is not proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, debarred, suspended, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from the covered transaction, unless it knows that the certification is erroneous. A participant may decide the method and frequency by which it determines the eligibility of its principals. Each participant may, but is not required to, check the List of Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs. 8. Nothing contained in the foregoing shall be construed to require establishment of a system of records in order to render in good faith the certification required by this clause. The knowledge and information of a participant is not required to exceed that which is normally possessed by a prudent person in the ordinary course of business dealings. 9. Except for transactions authorized under paragraph 5 of these instructions, if a participant in a covered transaction knowingly enters into a lower tier covered transaction with a person who is proposed for debarment under 48 CFR Part 9, subpart 9.4, suspended, debarred, ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction, in addition to other remedies available to the Federal government, the department or agency with which this transaction originated may pursue available remedies, including suspension and/or debarment. Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, Ineligibility and Voluntary Exclusion – Lower Tier Covered Transactions: 1. The prospective lower tier participant certifies, by submission of this proposal, that neither it nor its principals is presently debarred, suspended, proposed for debarment, declared ineligible, or voluntarily excluded from participation in this transaction by any Federal department or agency. 2. Where the prospective lower tier participant is unable to certify to any of the statements in this certification, such prospective participant shall attach an explanation to this proposal. 84 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 POLICY ON SEAT BELT USE In accordance with Executive Order 13043, Increasing Seat Belt Use in the United States, dated April 16, 1997, the Grantee is encouraged to adopt and enforce on-the-job seat belt use policies and programs for its employees when operating company-owned, rented, or personally-owned vehicles. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) is responsible for providing leadership and guidance in support of this Presidential initiative. For information on how to implement such a program, or statistics on the potential benefits and cost-savings to your company or organization, please visit the Buckle Up America section on NHTSA’s website at www.nhtsa.dot.gov. Additional resources are available from the Network of Employers for Traffic Safety (NETS), a public-private partnership headquartered in the Washington, D.C. metropolitan area, and dedicated to improving the traffic safety practices of employers and employees. NETS is prepared to provide technical assistance, a simple, user-friendly program kit, and an award for achieving the President’s goal of 90 percent seat belt use. NETS can be contacted at 1 (888) 2210045 or visit its website at www.trafficsafety.org. POLICY ON BANNING TEXT MESSAGING WHILE DRIVING In accordance with Executive Order 13513, Federal Leadership On Reducing Text Messaging While Driving, and DOT Order 3902.10, Text Messaging While Driving, States are encouraged to adopt and enforce workplace safety policies to decrease crashed caused by distracted driving, including policies to ban text messaging while driving company-owned or -rented vehicles, Government-owned, leased or rented vehicles, or privately-owned when on official Government business or when performing any work on or behalf of the Government. States are also encouraged to conduct workplace safety initiatives in a manner commensurate with the size of the business, such as establishment of new rules and programs or re-evaluation of existing programs to prohibit text messaging while driving, and education, awareness, and other outreach to employees about the safety risks associated with texting while driving. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT The Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety has reviewed the State’s Fiscal Year highway safety planning document and hereby declares that no significant environmental impact will result from implementing this Highway Safety Plan. If, under a future revision, this Plan is modified in a manner that could result in a significant environmental impact and trigger the need for an environmental review, this office is prepared to take the action necessary to comply with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321, et seq.) and the implementing regulations of the Council on Environmental Quality (40 CFR Parts 1500-1517). SECTION 402 REQUIREMENTS The political subdivisions of this State are authorized, as part of the State highway safety program, to carry out within their jurisdictions local highway safety programs which have been approved by the Governor and are in accordance with the uniform guidelines promulgated by the Secretary of Transportation. (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(B)) 85 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 At least 40 percent (or 95 percent, as applicable) of all Federal funds apportioned to this State under 23 U.S.C. 402 for this fiscal year will be expended by or for the benefit of the political subdivision of the State in carrying out local highway safety programs (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(C), 402(h)(2)), unless this requirement is waived in writing. The State’s highway safety program provides adequate and reasonable access for the safe and convenient movement of physically handicapped persons, including those in wheelchairs, across curbs constructed or replaced on or after July 1, 1976, at all pedestrian crosswalks. (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(D)) The State will provide for an evidenced-based traffic safety enforcement program to prevent traffic violations, crashes, and crash fatalities and injuries in areas most at risk for such incidents. (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(E)) The State will implement activities in support of national highway safety goals to reduce motor vehicle related fatalities that also reflect the primary data-related crash factors within the State as identified by the State highway safety planning process, including: • Participation in the National high-visibility law enforcement mobilizations; • Sustained enforcement of statutes addressing impaired driving, occupant protection, and driving in excess of posted speed limits; • An annual statewide seat belt use survey in accordance with 23 CFR Part 1340 for the measurement of State seat belt use rates; • Development of statewide data systems to provide timely and effective data analysis to support allocation of highway safety resources; • Coordination of Highway Safety Plan, data collection, and information systems with the State strategic highway safety plan, as defined in 23 U.S.C. 148(a). (23 U.S.C. 402(b)(1)(F)) The State will actively encourage all relevant law enforcement agencies in the State to follow the guidelines established for vehicular pursuits issued by the International Association of Chiefs of Police that are currently in effect. (23 U.S.C. 402(j)) The State will not expend Section 402 funds to carry out a program to purchase, operate, or maintain an automated traffic enforcement system. (23 U.S.C. 402(c)(4)) 86 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 7.0 Section 405 Grant Application For FFY 2014, Arizona is applying for the following 405 incentive grants programs: • Part 2 – State (23 CFR 1200.22); Traffic Safety Information System Improvements • Part 3 – Impaired Driving Countermeasures (23 CFR 1200.23); and • Part 5 – Motorcyclist Safety (23 CFR 1200.25). The 405 application, which is signed by Arizona’s Governor’s Representative for Highway Safety and includes the completed sections of the Appendix D to Part 1200 – Certification and Assurances for National Priority Safety Program Grants and the accompanying documentation, will be sent separately to NHTSA. 89 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 A. Appendix: DUI Abatement Council GOHS in June 2011, resumed staffing and management of the Oversight Council on driving or Operating Under the Influence Abatement (DUI Abatement Council). This council was established by the Arizona Legislature in 1996 and became effective on October 1, 1997. The GOHS was one of the agencies that created and staffed the council twice before. The funds are derived from a $250 assessment or fine on every Extreme or Aggravated DUI Conviction in Arizona. These funds are used for DUI Enforcement Overtime and Innovative Programs as approved by the Council. The GOHS is a member of the council and Alberto Gutier, the Director of GOHS, is a voting member and he represents the Arizona Speaker of the House of Representatives since 1998. ARS-28-1401-1402. A-1 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Table A.1 DUI Abatement Council Grant Awards as of June 17, 2013 Agency Name Agreement Title/Purpose Executed (Start) End Awarded Pending 6-30-2014 $100,000.00 AZ DPS DUIAC-E-019 DUI Enforcement OT BASIC DUIAC-I-009 “Own Up” Campaign – Youth Alcohol 6-12-2013 12-31-2013 $141,440.00 Coolidge PD DUIAC-E-006 DUI Enforcement OT 4-29-2013 12-31-2013 $3,357.00 Coolidge PD DUIAC-I-008 Designated Driver Reward Program 4-29-2013 12-31-2013 $1,125.00 Glendale PD DUIAC-I-007 “Know Your Limit” DUI Campaign OT 5-28-2013 12-31-2013 $40,303.00 Glendale PD DUIAC-E-015 DUI Enforcement OT 6-10-2013 12-31-2013 $50,000.00 MCSO DUIAC-E-017 DUI Enforcement OT and Detention Support Pending 12-31-2013 $75,000.00 Mesa PD DUIAC-E-004 Forensic Toxicology Analysis – Crime Lab 2-6-2013 6-30-2013 $200,000.00 Mesa PD DUIAC-E-013 DUI Enforcement OT 6-4-2013 12-31-2013 $100,000.00 Mesa Prosecutors Office DUIAC-I-006 -A DUI Disclosure/Litigation Support 2-6-2013 12-31-2013 $59,550.00 Phoenix PD DUIAC-I-004 PSA Contest – Youth Alcohol 10-9-2012 6-30-2013 $15,000.00 Phoenix PD DUIAC-E-012 DUI Enforcement OT 5-25-2013 12-31-2013 $100,000.00 Phoenix Prosecutors Office DUIAC-E-002 Recidivism Study – DUI Cases 10-1-2012 6-30-2013 $18,480.00 Phoenix Prosecutors Office DUIAC-I-003 Traffic Safety Resource Prosecutor 10-1-2012 6-30-2013 $110,523.00 Phoenix Prosecutors Office DUIAC-I-005 DUI Evidence Interface 2-6-2013 6-30-2013 $37,958.00 Prescott PD DUIAC-I-010 DUI Education and Awareness Campaign OT 6-4-2013 12-31-2013 $30,000.00 Quartzsite PD DUIAC-E-007 DUI Enforcement OT 4-25-2013 12-31-2013 $7,560.00 Salt River PD (SRPMIC) DUIAC-E-014 DUI Enforcement OT 5-21-2013 12-31-2013 $59,000.00 Scottsdale PD DUIAC-E-008 DUI Enforcement OT 6-4-2013 12-31-2013 $100,000.00 Show Low PD DUIAC-E-009 DUI Enforcement OT 4-25-2013 12-31-2013 $7,040.00 Tempe PD DUIAC-E-005 Youth Alcohol Party Patrol OT 2-6-2013 6-30-2013 $30,000.00 Tempe PD DUIAC-E-010 Youth Alcohol Party Patrol OT 5-1-2013 12-31-2013 $80,000.00 A-3 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Agency Name Agreement Title/Purpose Executed (Start) End Awarded Tempe PD DUIAC-E-018 DUI Enforcement OT Pending 12-31-2013 $80,000.00 Thatcher PD DUIAC-E-016 DUI/Youth Alcohol Project OT 6-3-2013 12-31-2013 $23,757.00 Tucson PD DUIAC-E-011 DUI Enforcement OT 5-3-2013 12-31-2013 $100,000.00 U of A PD DUIAC-E-003 DUI Enforcement OT – college 10-9-2012 12-31-2013 $35,000.00 Total Awarded Source: GOHS FFY 2013. A-4 $1,605,093.00 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 B. Appendix: Supporting Information Figure B.1 Arizona Statewide Roadway Fatalities Trend Note: Data most recently updated August, 7, 2012. B-5 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure B.2 Arizona Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities By Month B-6 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure B.3 Arizona Traffic Fatalities Monthly Trend Note: The numbers provided are preliminary and subject to change at any time. Fatal crash information is still being received. Data most recently updated June 4, 2013. B-7 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure B.4 Arizona DUI Enforcement Statistics for Calendar Year 2012 B-8 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure B.5 2012 East Valley Holiday DUI Task Force B-9 State of Arizona Highway Safety Plan FFY 2014 Figure B.6 Mesa Police Department Alcohol and Drug Cases 2012 B-10