1. MIRE FDEs The Clock is Ticking
TRF – Austin, TX
Robert Pollack
Nancy Lefler
August 5, 2019
Bob
Thank you for joining us for this discussion of MIRE FDE and 2.0.
[General introduction(s) of presenter(s)]

2. MIRE Background
Bob
We’ll begin with some background on MIRE – what it is, why it’s important for roadway safety, and how to use it.

3. MIRE – Model Inventory of Roadway Elements
Recommended listing of roadway and traffic elements critical to safety management
Data dictionary – definition, attributes, etc.
MIRE 1.0 released in 2010
MIRE 2.0 released in 2017
The Model Inventory of Roadway Elements, or MIRE, is part of the Roadway Safety Data Program, or RSDP, which is contributing to the evolution of more robust roadway data systems and advanced data-driven safety capabilities.
MIRE is a listing of recommended roadway and traffic elements critical to safety management. MIRE provides a data dictionary where each element is listed along with a definition and list of attributes (or coding). Some elements also include illustrations that provide supplemental information. FHWA released MIRE 1.0 in 2010.
MIRE 2.0 includes a revised format to reflect agencies’ transitions to modern database environments away from siloed datasets. Version 2.0 aligns with other Federal datasets, including the Highway Performance Monitoring System) and requirements to provide more consistent guidance across FHWA agencies, updates operational and design elements that have become more widely implemented, and provides a resource for meeting Federal safety data requirements. It was released in 2017.

4. Why MIRE?
Using roadway/traffic data merged with crash data enables users to:
Develop relationships of safety to roadway features and user exposure.
Better identify location and characteristics of crashes.
Better determine appropriate countermeasures and strategies.
Evaluate the effectiveness of safety treatments.
MIRE includes necessary roadway, traffic, and crash data. The ability to merge those datasets helps agencies see relationships between roadway features, user exposure, and crashes. They can then identify crash locations and characteristics and determine what countermeasures are appropriate. Lastly, they can evaluate how effective these treatments are.

5. How to Use MIRE
States should take what is useful in MIRE and apply it in a way that helps improve their inventory, and ultimately lead to better data-driven decision making.
As a guideline, it is not intended that a State will collect every MIRE element, nor have all their element names and attributes match to MIRE exactly. Rather, States should take what is useful in MIRE and apply it in a way that helps improve their inventory, and ultimately lead to better data-driven decision making.

6. How to Use MIRE Meeting the FDE Requirement
Improving overall roadway data inventory
Improving or adding a category of elements
Improving single elements
States can use MIRE to improve their roadway inventory in several ways:
Meeting the FDE Requirement: Regulation requires that States submit a MIRE FDE data collection plan by July 1, 2017, with a fully populated inventory MIRE FDE elements for all public roads by September 30, FHWA guidance suggests that in planning for these improvements. States perform a gap analysis of what elements they currently collect and what they might still need to collect.
Improving overall roadway data inventory: A State can review the MIRE elements and attributes to gain additional insight into what data elements might be missing or what attributes can be refined in their inventory to better support safety management.
Improving or adding a category of elements: MIRE is a good resource to provide a State a starting place for the types of elements to include and the potential attributes to capture.
Improving single elements: A State can use MIRE as a resource if they are looking to improve or add a specific element into their inventory, such as tapered edge. MIRE can provide the potential definition and attributes the State would like to use for that element.

7. MIRE 2.0 Revisions General structure Elements Roadway segment data
Roadway alignment data
Roadway junction data

8. General Structure MIRE 1.0 MIRE 2.0 Divided into six data categories:
Segment
Intersection
Intersection Leg
Interchange/Ramp
Horizontal Curve
Vertical Grade
There are 202 elements in MIRE 1.0 divided into three main categories: roadway segments, roadway alignments, and roadway junctions. Each main category is further broken down into several subcategories.
FHWA revised the format of MIRE in MIRE V 2.0 to reflect agencies’ transitions to modern database formats away from siloed datasets. The FHWA MIRE project team condensed the categories and subcategories of elements from MIRE V 1.0 into six simplified data types to better reflect how an agency would manage MIRE data in a modern database environment. These six data types include:
Segment
Intersection
Intersection Leg
Interchange/Ramp
Horizontal Curve
Vertical Grade

9. Elements Updated to meet HPMS/Fed datasets
Updated to reflect evolving operational and design practices
Added new elements

10. MIRE FDEs
Bob
We’ll begin with some background on MIRE – what it is, why it’s important for roadway safety, and how to use it.

11. Fixing America's Surface Transportation Act (FAST Act)
Guidance on State Safety Data Systems
State safety data capabilities required to satisfy the HSIP requirements
Essentially rely on data driven decision safety analysis for HSIP program direction
The safety data collection, integration, improvement, and analysis activities eligible for HSIP funding
Develop a subset of MIRE data elements useful for the inventory of roadway safety
Bottom line result – Significant reductions in fatalities and serious injuries on ALL public roads
Safety data systems can be the Paths to funding for safety improvements (HSIP)
Funding to develop safety data systems (HSIP)

12. Highway Safety Improvement Program
State Safety Data System Capabilities
All Public Roads
Common Base Map
Crash Data System
Roadway Data System
Traffic Data System
MIRE FDE
Safety Data
Safety Analysis and Evaluation
Priorities
And
Project Selection

13. Safety Management Methods
The roadway safety management process is an integral part of the project development process. The results provide information for system planning, project planning, design and construction, and operations and maintenance of a transportation system. The first 3 guides in the series cover network screening, diagnosis, and countermeasure selection.
[Click] Step 1. Network screening is the process of analyzing the network to identify sites for further investigation.
[Click] Step 2. Diagnosis is the process of further investigating sites identified in network screening to identify existing and potential safety issues.
[Click] Step 3. Countermeasure selection is the process of assessing ways to address or mitigate the underlying safety issues identified in diagnosis.
[Click] Steps 4 and 5 cover economic appraisal and project prioritization. Economic appraisal is the process of comparing the relative costs and benefits of the various alternatives when it is not feasible or practical to implement all potential countermeasures. Project prioritization is the process of developing a portfolio of projects for construction based on available funding in a given fiscal year. There are not separate guides for economic appraisal or project prioritization in this series because these involve policy-level decisions such as: appropriate crash costs, discount rates, selected economic method, non-monetary local considerations, and overall agency goals.
[Click] The fourth guide covers safety effectiveness evaluation, which is the process of estimating the safety impacts of implemented projects, which provides a critical feedback link for future decisions.
[Click] The fifth guide focuses on the systemic approach to safe8oty management, which describes a complementary approach to the methods described in the network screening, diagnosis, and countermeasure selection guides.
The purpose of this series is to demonstrate the value of more reliable methods in these activities, and demonstrate limitations of traditional (less reliable) methods.

14. MIRE FDEs Requirements
Table 1, non-local paved roads, 37 elements, 19 HPMS
Table 2, Local Paved Roads, 9 elements, 8 HPMS
Table 3, Unpaved Roads, 5 elements, 4 HPMS
The FAST Act adds the provision that States may elect not to collect the MIRE FDE on gravel or otherwise unpaved roads as long as they meet two conditions:
A. The States do not use HSIP funds on any unpaved road for which they do not collect the MIRE FDEs [23 U.S.C. 148(k)(1)(A)]; and
B. The States demonstrate having consulted with affected Indian tribes before ceasing to collect data on roads included in the National Tribal Transportation Facility Inventory [23 U.S.C. 148(k)(1)(B)].
No gravel data, no HSIP funding required
Minimum elements for network screening – Table 1

15. How were the MIRE FDE Chosen? FDEs Should Enable Agencies to:
Define roadway segments, intersections and interchanges/ramps
Delineate basic information needed to characterize the roadway type and exposure
Identify governmental ownership and functional classification consistent with the HSIP reporting requirements

16. MIRE FDE Graphics Demo https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/fde/illustrations.html

17. MIRE FDE Critical Dates
July 1, 2017 – Incorporate specific quantifiable and measurable anticipated improvements that prioritizes the collection of MIRE FDE into the Traffic Records Strategic Plan
September 30, 2026 – Access to a complete collection of MIRE FDE on all public roads

18. MIRE FDE Follow-up
Each year states will be asked to report progress towards meeting the MIRE FDE requirements as part of their annual HSIP update due each August
States may contact FHWA Division Offices or the Office of Safety with any questions pertaining to the MIRE FDEs

19. FDE Status Update

20. Current Status of State FDE Process
Office of Safety has begun a process to ascertain the current status of State progress toward compliance with FDE requirement
Will arrange sessions with Division Office on how the State is progressing toward FDE compliance
Identify challenges and opportunities for MIRE FDE improvement

21. FHWA Resources

22. Technical Assistance Roadway Data Improvement Program (RDIP)
Safety Data and Analysis Technical Assistance
Local Data Integration Technical Assistance
Safety Data Management and Governance Technical Assistance
Office of Safety Technical Assistance Program (the Peer-to-Peer Program)

23. Thank you
Federal Highway Administration Office of Safety Robert Pollack,
For additional information please contact Bob Pollack or Dr. Carol Tan, who led this effort for FHWA.

24. MIRE FDE Graphics Non-local paved segments

25. MIRE FDE Graphics Local paved segments

26. MIRE FDE Graphics Unpaved roads

27. MIRE FDE Graphics Non-local paved intersections

28. MIRE FDE Graphics Non-local paved interchanges /ramps