The State's triennial Highway Safety Plan documents a three-year period of the State's highway safety program that is data-driven in establishing performance targets and selecting the countermeasure strategies for programming funds to meet those performance targets.

(a) Due date for submission. A State shall submit its triennial Highway Safety Plan electronically to NHTSA no later than 11:59 p.m. EDT on July 1 preceding the first fiscal year covered by the plan. Failure to meet this deadline may result in delayed approval of the triennial Highway Safety Plan which could impact approval and funding under a State's annual grant application.

(b) Contents. In order to be approved, the triennial highway safety plan submitted by the State must cover three fiscal years, beginning with the first fiscal year following submission of the plan, and contain the following components:

(1) Highway safety planning process and problem identification. (i) Description of the processes, data sources and information used by the State in its highway safety planning (i.e., problem identification, public participation and engagement, performance measures, and countermeasure strategies); and

(ii) Description and analysis of the State's overall highway safety problems as identified through an analysis of data, including but not limited to fatality, injury, enforcement, judicial, geospatial and sociodemographic data.

(2) Public participation and engagement—(i) Triennial HSP engagement planning. Description of the State's public participation and engagement planning efforts in the highway safety planning process and program, including—

(A) A statement of the State's starting goals for the public engagement efforts, including how the public engagement efforts will contribute to the development of the State's highway safety program, including countermeasure strategies for programming funds;

(B) Identification of the affected and potentially affected communities, including particular emphasis on underserved communities and communities overrepresented in the data, (i.e., what communities did the State identify at the outset of the process) and a description of how those communities were identified;

(ii) Triennial HSP engagement outcomes. A narrative description of the outcomes of the State's engagement efforts in the highway safety planning process, including—

(A) The steps taken by the State to produce meaningful engagement with affected communities, including—

(1) Engagement opportunities conducted and a description of how those opportunities were designed to reach the communities identified in paragraph (b)(2)(i)(B) of this section;

(2) Accessibility measures implemented by the State in its outreach efforts and in conducting engagement opportunities;

(B) The results of the engagement opportunities conducted, including—

(1) A description of attendees and participants, and, to the extent feasible, whether those participants are members of the affected communities identified in paragraph (2)(i)(B);

(2) A summary of the issues covered; and

(C) How the affected communities' comments and views have been incorporated into the development of the triennial HSP.

(iii) Ongoing engagement planning. A description of the public participation and engagement efforts in the State highway safety program that the State plans to undertake during the three-year period covered by the triennial HSP, including—

(A) A statement of the State's goals for the public engagement efforts;

(B) Identification of the affected and potentially affected communities, including particular emphasis on underserved communities and communities overrepresented in the data (i.e., what communities did the State identify at the outset of the process), and a description of how those communities were identified;

(C) The steps the State plans to take to reach and engage those communities, including accessibility measures implemented by the State in its outreach efforts and in conducting engagement opportunities; and

(D) How the affected communities' comments and views will be incorporated into the decision-making process.

(3) Performance plan. (i) List of data-driven, quantifiable and measurable highway safety performance targets, as laid out in paragraphs (b)(3)(ii) and (iii) of this section, that demonstrate constant or improved performance over the three-year period covered by the triennial HSP and based on highway safety program areas identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section.

(ii) All performance measures developed by NHTSA in collaboration with the Governors Highway Safety Association (“Traffic Safety Performance Measures for States and Federal Agencies” (DOT HS 811 025)), as revised in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402(k)(5) and published in the Federal Register, which must be used as minimum measures in developing the performance targets identified in paragraph (b)(3)(i) of this section, provided that—

(A) At least one performance measure and performance target that is data-driven shall be provided for each program area identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section that enables the State to track progress toward meeting the quantifiable annual target;

(B) For each program area performance measure, the State shall provide—

(1) Documentation of the current safety levels, based on the most currently available data;

(2) Quantifiable performance targets that show constant or improved performance compared to the safety levels provided under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(B)(1) of this section, and extend through the final year covered by the triennial HSP, with annual benchmarks to assist States in tracking progress; and

(3) Justification for each performance target that explains how the target is data-driven, including a discussion of the factors that influenced the performance target selection; and

(C) Except as provided in paragraph (b)(3)(iv) of this section, State HSP performance targets are identical to the State DOT targets for common performance measures (fatality, fatality rate, and serious injuries) reported in the HSIP annual report, as coordinated through the State SHSP.

(iii) Additional performance measures not included under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section. For program areas identified by the State where performance measures have not been jointly developed (e.g., risky drivers, vulnerable road users, etc.) and for which States are using highway safety program grant funds, the State shall develop its own performance measures and performance targets that are data-driven, and shall provide the same information as required under paragraph (b)(3)(ii) of this section.

(iv) For fiscal year 2024 only, the performance targets submitted for common performance measures under paragraph (b)(3)(ii)(C) of this section are not required to be identical to the State DOT targets reported in the HSIP annual report.

(4) Countermeasure strategy for programming funds. For each program area identified by the State during the planning process conducted under paragraph (b)(1) of this section, a description of the countermeasure strategies that will guide the State's program implementation and annual project selection in order to achieve specific performance targets described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section, including, at a minimum—

(i) The problem identified during the planning process described in paragraph (b)(1) of this section that the countermeasure strategy addresses and a description of the link between the problem identification and the countermeasure strategy;

(ii) A list of the countermeasures that the State will implement, including—

(A) For countermeasures rated 3 or more stars in Countermeasures That Work, recommended in a NHTSA-facilitated program assessment report, or included in the Uniform Guidelines for State Highway Safety Programs, provide the citation to the countermeasure in the most recent edition of Countermeasures That Work; or

(B) For all other countermeasures, provide justification supporting the countermeasure, including available data, data analysis, research, evaluation and/or substantive anecdotal evidence, that supports the effectiveness of the proposed countermeasure strategy;

(iii) Identification of the performance target(s) the countermeasure strategy will address, along with an explanation of the link between the effectiveness of the countermeasure strategy and the performance target;

(iv) A description of any Federal funds that the State plans to use to carry out the countermeasure strategy including, at a minimum, the funding source(s) (e.g., Section 402, Section 405(b), etc.) and an estimated allocation of funds;

(v) A description of considerations the State will use to determine what projects to fund to implement the countermeasure strategy, including, as applicable, public engagement, traffic safety data, affected communities, impacted locations, solicitation of proposals; and P>(vi) A description of the manner in which the countermeasure strategy was informed by the uniform guidelines issued in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 402(a)(2) and, if applicable, NHTSA-facilitated programmatic assessments.

(5) Performance report. A report on the State's progress towards meeting State performance targets from the most recently submitted triennial HSP, based on the most currently available data, including—

(i) An explanation of the extent to which the State's progress in achieving those targets aligns with the triennial HSP; and

(ii) A description of how the countermeasure strategies implemented during the triennial period contributed to meeting the State's highway safety performance targets.

(c) Review and approval procedures—(1) General. Subject to paragraphs (c)(2) and (4) of this section, the Regional Administrator shall review and approve or disapprove a triennial HSP within 60 days after date of receipt. NHTSA will not approve a triennial HSP that does not meet the requirements of this section.

(2) Additional information. NHTSA may request additional information from a State to ensure compliance with the requirements of this part. Upon receipt of the request, the State must submit the requested information within 7 business days. NHTSA may extend the deadline for approval or disapproval of the triennial HSP by no more than 90 additional days, as necessary to facilitate the request.

(3) Approval or disapproval of triennial Highway Safety Plan. Within 60 days after receipt of the triennial HSP under this subpart, the Regional Administrator shall issue—

(i) A letter of approval, with conditions, if any, to the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety; or

(ii) A letter of disapproval to the Governor's Representative for Highway Safety informing the State of the reasons for disapproval and requiring resubmission of the triennial HSP with any modifications necessary for approval.

(4) Resubmission of disapproved triennial Highway Safety Plan. The State shall resubmit the triennial HSP with necessary modifications within 30 days after the date of disapproval. The Regional Administrator shall issue a letter of approval or disapproval within 30 days after receipt of a revised triennial HSP resubmitted as provided in paragraph (c)(3)(ii) of this section.