Page 1 of 54

NEW MEXICO

2018 ANNUAL REPORT
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 2 of 54

Table of Contents

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................................................... 2

Disclaimer ............................................................................................................................................................... 3

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................................ 4

Introduction ............................................................................................................................................................. 6

Program Structure ................................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Administration...................................................................................................................................... 6

Program Methodology ........................................................................................................................................ 9

Project Implementation ......................................................................................................................................... 17

Funds Programmed ........................................................................................................................................... 17

General Listing of Projects ............................................................................................................................... 20

Safety Performance ............................................................................................................................................... 23

General Highway Safety Trends ....................................................................................................................... 23

Safety Performance Targets .............................................................................................................................. 37

Applicability of Special Rules .......................................................................................................................... 38

Evaluation ............................................................................................................................................................. 41

Program Effectiveness ...................................................................................................................................... 41

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements ...................................................................... 42

Year 2012 .............................................................................................................................................................. 42

Project Effectiveness ......................................................................................................................................... 46

Compliance Assessment ....................................................................................................................................... 47
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 3 of 54

Disclaimer 

Protection of Data from Discovery Admission into Evidence 

23 U.S.C. 148(h)(4) states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or 

data compiled or collected for any purpose relating to this section [HSIP], shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location identified or addressed in the reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or other data.” 

23 U.S.C. 409 states “Notwithstanding any other provision of law, reports, surveys, schedules, lists, or data 

compiled or collected for the purpose of identifying, evaluating, or planning the safety enhancement of 

potential accident sites, hazardous roadway conditions, or railway-highway crossings, pursuant to sections 

130, 144, and 148 of this title or for the purpose of developing any highway safety construction improvement 

project which may be implemented utilizing Federal-aid highway funds shall not be subject to discovery or 

admitted into evidence in a Federal or State court proceeding or considered for other purposes in any action for 

damages arising from any occurrence at a location mentioned or addressed in such reports, surveys, schedules, 

lists, or data.” 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 4 of 54

Executive Summary 

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) report is an annual update prepared by the Statewide 

Planning Bureau (SPB) of the New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT) Asset Management and 

Planning Division (AMPD). The 2018 HSIP Annual Report is based on the best and most recent available 

transportation safety data and information, which is the FFY 2017 program. To facilitate a transparent 

stakeholder process, the NMDOT SPB, for infrastructure related improvements, coordinates with internal and 

external safety partners in New Mexico through a comprehensive communication process. In the preparation of 

the Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP), the SPB considers the Strategic Highway Safety Plan 

(SHSP), efforts related to the Highway Safety Plan (HSP), and the Commercial Vehicle Safety Plan (CVSP). 

This coordination helps to provide consistency of data presented in this report, integrated safety initiatives, 

consistent identification of performance trends, implementation of sound best safety practices, and facilitation 

of safety performance assessment. This coordinated safety planning effort allows NMDOT to allocate limited 

safety dollars to areas with the greatest safety needs and to effectively support NMDOT goals, safety 

strategies, and performance targets to reduce fatalities and serious injuries on the state transportation system. 

Overall, in New Mexico, from 2013 there has been a 9.8 % increase in fatalities from 347 to 379. Suspected 

serious injuries (A) declined by 29.0% from 1,624 to 1,153 during the same reporting period. 

With respect to the five-year rolling fatality average, from 2013 to 2017 there has been a slight increase in the 

overall trend in fatalities. A comparison of annual values of the five-year rolling average indicates an increase 

of 2.4 % in 2016 to 355.2 fatalities compared to 2013 with 347.0 fatalities. For suspected serious injuries (A) 

there has been a consistent reduction in New Mexico for the past five years (2012 to 2016) from 1624 to 1153, 

a decrease of 29.0%. Similar decreases in the five-year rolling average for the suspected serious (A) injury rate 

have been noted.

The rate of fatalities in New Mexico increased from 2013 to 2017 (preliminary estimate) from 1.240 to 1.335 

fatalities per 100M VMT (vehicle miles of travel), or by 7.7%. The five-year moving average declined from 

1.361 to 1.325 fatalities per 100M VMT, or by 2.6%.

The rate of serious injuries in New Mexico declined from 2012 to 2016 from 6.353 to 4.146 serious injuries per 

100M VMT (vehicle miles of travel), or by 34.7%. The five-year moving average declined from 7.062 to 5.082 

serious injuries per 100M VMT, or by 28.0%.

There has been an increase in non-motorized fatalities and suspected serious injuries from 2012 to 2016 from 

157 to 191, an increase of 21.6% and an increase in the five-year rolling average of 15.9% (161.8 to 187.6)

In FFY 2017, NMDOT continued to make significant progress in successfully programming and obligating HSIP 

funds, as well as continued implementation of a process for funding and eliminating a backlog of projects for 

future years. This included further development of a structured list of Road Safety Audits (RSAs) planned and 

performed, and a comprehensive, organized, process of consultation with internal and external project 

stakeholders.

The most recent update of the NM Strategic Highway Safety Plan (SHSP) was approved and distributed to 

safety stakeholders in March 2017. 

In 2017 and 2018, NMDOT completed an update of performance targets for each of the five core performance 

measures for fatalities (F), suspected serious injuries (A), fatality rate, suspected serious injury rate, and nonmotorized fatalities and suspected serious injuries (A). 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 5 of 54

NMDOT initiated an effort to develop an HSIP Manual which is scheduled for completion in late 2018. In 2017, 

a pilot effort was initiated to develop a Multi Objective Decision (MODA) Process for the prioritization of current 

HSIP projects and may be refined in future years. It is anticipated that this process will be referenced in the 

HSIP Manual that is under development. In 2018 NMDOT initiated a network screening process which will 

focus first on the identification of high risk locations on rural and urban two-lane primary roads on the NMDOT 

network and on the identification of high pedestrian crash locations.

To more effectively manage the NMDOT HSIP program in 2018, NMDOT is augmenting staff with consultant 

support and is completing an effort to hire a full-time HSIP staff person to replace the individual that resigned 

earlier this year.

Other accomplishments include continued improvements in crash data reporting and analysis as evidenced by 

the improved level of detail and quality of data in this year’s report. Over the past several years, there has been 

progress in the location of crashes, an improved ability to identify crash occurrence by functional class and 

ownership, and an ability to calculate, on a statewide basis, crash rates to assess trends for safety 

performance targets. Local safety road projects are a key component in the HSIP with $1,029,276 obligated for 

Federal Fiscal Year (FFY) reporting period of 2017. The NMDOT HSIP Safety Program is including a more 

detailed and extensive analysis of safety performance, Emphasis Areas and strategies planned in HSIP 

projects are based on the SHSP to effectively reduce fatalities and severe crashes on all roads in New Mexico. 

NMDOT recently initiated a study to identify high risk locations on principal arterials and for pedestrian crashes 

using recommended network screening methods contained in Part B of the HSM.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 6 of 54

Introduction

The Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a core Federal-aid program with the purpose of achieving 

a significant reduction in fatalities and serious injuries on all public roads. As per 23 U.S.C. 148(h) and 23 CFR 

924.15, States are required to report annually on the progress being made to advance HSIP implementation and 

evaluation efforts. The format of this report is consistent with the HSIP Reporting Guidance dated December 

29, 2016 and consists of five sections: program structure, progress in implementing highway safety 

improvement projects, progress in achieving safety outcomes and performance targets, effectiveness of the 

improvements and compliance assessment.

Program Structure

Program Administration

Describe the general structure of the HSIP in the State. 

The NMDOT HSIP program is in a state of transition. In 2018, the SPB who manages the HSIP program is 

restructuring its safety management process to adopt a focus on reviewing the transportation network to 

identify and rank sites based on the potential to reduce fatal and injury crashes. Once the locations exhibiting 

these issues are identified, an evidence-based diagnosis and countermeasure process will be followed. The 

SPB will work with NMDOT Districts and tribal and local public agencies to implement this process. The 

procedures to accomplish this will be included in the HSIP Manual that is under development. It is anticipated 

that this process will be fully online for FFY 2020.

The structure of the HSIP program is multidisciplinary and at various levels includes NMDOT, local agency 

stakeholders for those jurisdictions developing projects, with FHWA oversight as appropriate. The HSIP 

program is monitored by the NMDOT Safety Committee which includes members from engineering, design, 

finance, rail, and traffic from within NMDOT and the FHWA. The committee oversees project selection and 

allocation of funds to determine where the funds can be most efficiently utilized to optimize safety performance.

Where is HSIP staff located within the State DOT? 

 Other-Statewide Planning Bureau

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The HSIP program is located in and administered by the NMDOT Statewide Planning Bureau.

How are HSIP funds allocated in a State? 

Other-General Office review and approval from the NMDOT Safety Committee

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 7 of 54

To more efficiently allocate funds and help investigate need on a more comprehensive basis New Mexico is 

currently developing a Multi Objective Decision Analysis (MODA) process. This process will include 

quantitative and qualitative measures to support the prioritization of project locations that demonstrate a high 

safety need based on the described network screening process. The SPB is also working on an HSIP Manual, 

the network screening of two-lane rural and urban NMDOT roadways to identify high-risk locations, and the 

identification of high pedestrian crash locations.

Describe how local and tribal roads are addressed as part of HSIP.

Under the NM HSIP program all public roadways are eligible for participation. For the HSIP program covered in 

this reporting period (FFY 2017), 3.8% of NM HSIP funds are obligated for local road projects , and 96.2% are 

obligated for Statewide DOT projects. The majority of the HSIP projects in the HSIP Program for FFY 2017 

were approved by the Safety Committee based on applications and/or RSA reports. In general, these 

applications were reviewed and, if approved, were prioritized by the NMDOT Safety Committee, independent 

of project jurisdiction - proposed HSIP projects on local and tribal maintained roadways were considered in the 

same manner as proposed projects on NMDOT roads. 

Identify which internal partners (e.g., State departments of transportation (DOTs) Bureaus, Divisions) 

are involved with HSIP planning.

Traffic Engineering/Safety

Design

Planning 

Maintenance

Operations 

Districts/Regions

Local Aid Programs Office/Division

Governors Highway Safety Office 

Other-NMDOT Districts

Other-Statewide Planning Bureau

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The NMDOT Safety Committee is composed of voting members representing Design and Construction, Asset 

Management and Planning Division, and the Modals Division, as well as advisory members from FHWA-NM, 

the Statewide Transportation Improvement Program Unit, Technical Groups and Rail. The Safety Committee 

reviews all applications to ensure a proposed project is consistent with the SHSP and will contribute to 

achievement of NMDOT safety targets. Local stakeholders are required to verify their support for a project. An 

NMDOT district must verify that a proposed project meets the HSIP eligibility requirements and is consistent 

with the NMDOT STIP and scheduling considerations.

Describe coordination with internal partners.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 8 of 54

The NMDOT Safety Committee meets monthly to review the HSIP, and confirm the program is meeting the 

goals and objectives of the NM SHSP, and safety targets. The Safety Committee is composed of the following 

voting and advisory members:

Voting members:

• Design and Construction Director 

• Asset Management and Planning Division Director 

• Modals Division Director 

Advisory members:

• HSIP Coordinator 

• FHWA-NM Safety 

• STIP Unit 

• Technical Groups 

• Rail Bureau Chief 

The HSIP Coordinator also interacts closely with the three NMDOT Regional Design Centers to coordinate 

local project tracking and oversight needs. In addition, the HSIP Coordinator, in overseeing the SHSP, liaisons 

closely with NMDOT Traffic Safety Division which is responsible for the NMDOT Highway Safety Plan. The 

Modals Division Director is the NM representative to the Governor's Highway Safety Commission.

Identify which external partners are involved with HSIP planning.

Regional Planning Organizations (e.g. MPOs, RPOs, COGs) 

Local Technical Assistance Program

Local Government Agency 

Tribal Agency

Law Enforcement Agency 

Academia/University

FHWA

Other-Regional Transportation Planning Organizations 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In the last several years, NMDOT has made efforts to engage local agencies such as MPOs, RTPOs, and 

tribal agencies in SHSP safety planning and development, and setting of annual safety targets. An example, 

for safety target setting, MPOs either adopt those of NMDOT or develop their own.

Describe coordination with external partners.

All of the external partners listed in the previous question may be involved in the coordination process, 

particularly for the conduct of RSAs. Examples include data collection by local law enforcement, data 

management by academia such as the University of New Mexico, and the provision of data for the conduct of 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 9 of 54

RSAs. Typically, as a part of RSAs, local partners are also involved in identifying location specific phenomena, 

lending their expertise and insights to safety related issues, as well as development of safety diagnosis and 

countermeasures. NMDOT finds local expertise invaluable when considering safety issues and needs, and the 

identification of lessons learned related to the implementation of countermeasures, and identification of context 

sensitive issues whether they are cultural or behavioral.

Have any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

Yes

Describe HSIP program administration practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

The program is transitioning towards the adoption of HSIP procedures that will be defined in the HSIP Manual 

and support a more robust project development process. The HSIP program is moving towards a more data 

driven process, based in the adoption of a more safety performance-based process as described in the HSM, 

particularly by the use of network screening to identify high crash locations. This process includes identification 

of high crash pedestrian sites. 

Are there any other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of HSIP Administration on which the State would like to elaborate. 

The NMDOT made significant progress in 2016-2018 to program and obligate HSIP funds and to provide a 

systematic process for funding a backlog of projects. This includes maintenance of a structured list of RSAs 

planned and performed that will be used for future projects. As described above, the SPB implemented a 

comprehensive and organized process of communication with internal and external stakeholders.

Program Methodology

Does the State have an HSIP manual or similar that clearly describes HSIP planning, implementation 

and evaluation processes?

No

To upload a copy of the State processes, attach files below.

File Name:

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 10 of 54

Currently, an HSIP Manual is being developed with completion anticipated in late 2018. This manual will serve 

as a guide to the execution and conduct of the HSIP program in the coming years that is consistent with the 

SHSP and other safety initiatives.

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP.

Median Barrier

Roadway Departure

Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The programs listed are based on safety concerns identified in the SHSP and by stakeholders as a safety 

need.

Program: Median Barrier 

Date of Program Methodology: 9/30/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Volume 

Lane miles 

Median width 

Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Other-Crash severity

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 11 of 54

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-NMDOT Selection Committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 100 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This program addresses SHSP Emphasis Area priority to reduce the severity of cross median crashes. The 

NMDOT installed cable median barriers on interstate routes to reduce the probability of a vehicle crossing the 

median and hitting an oncoming vehicle.

Additional comment for the “How are projects under this program advanced for implementation” section:

For projects advanced for implementation and inclusion in the Median Barrier program, NMDOT issues a call 

for projects to Districts. Based on responses, then a list of those projects is reviewed and compiled. NMDOT 

submits the list to the FHWA Division Office for review/approval. The projects approved by this process are 

advanced for implementation.

Program: Roadway Departure 

Date of Program Methodology: 9/30/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Funding set-aside
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 12 of 54

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

All crashes 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only 

Traffic 

Lane miles 

Functional classification 

Roadside features 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Crash frequency

Other-Crash severity

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

Yes

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-NMDOT Selection Committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration

Available funding : 100 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

This program addresses an SHSP Emphasis Area. This emphasis area had the highest ranking of all SHSP 

emphasis areas and largest frequency of fatal (F) and serious crashes (A). Projects in this program clearly 

address the SHSP and HSIP objective to reduce the frequency and severity of crashes.

Additional comment for the “How are projects under this program advanced for implementation” section:

For projects advanced for implementation and inclusion in the Roadway Departure program, NMDOT issues a 

call for projects to Districts. Based on responses, then a list of those projects is reviewed and compiled. 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 13 of 54

NMDOT submits the list to the FHWA Division Office for review/approval. The projects approved by this 

process are advanced for implementation.

Program: Sign Replacement And Improvement 

Date of Program Methodology: 9/30/2017 

What is the justification for this program? [Check all that apply]

Addresses SHSP priority or emphasis area 

FHWA focused approach to safety

What is the funding approach for this program? [Check one]

Other-Based on need to maintain minimum sign retroreflectivity for signs

What data types were used in the program methodology? [Check all that apply]

Crashes Exposure Roadway 

Fatal and serious injury crashes only Traffic Functional classification 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? [Check all that apply]

Other-Reduction in total crashes 

Are local roads (non-state owned and operated) included or addressed in this program?

No

Are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

Describe the methodology used to identify local road projects as part of this program.

How are projects under this program advanced for implementation?

Other-NMDOT Safety Committee

Select the processes used to prioritize projects for implementation. For the methods selected, indicate the 

relative importance of each process in project prioritization. Enter either the weights or numerical 

rankings. If weights are entered, the sum must equal 100. If ranks are entered, indicate ties by giving 

both processes the same rank and skip the next highest rank (as an example: 1, 2, 2, 4).

Rank of Priority Consideration
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 14 of 54

Available funding : 100 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In recent years with the retroreflectivity requirements for signs contained in the MUTCD, there has been an 

increased emphasis on maintaining signs to minimum levels of retroreflectivity to address driver visibility needs 

particularly at night and in inclement weather. Sign replacement and improvement leads to better conspicuity 

and legibility of information provided to drivers.

Additional comment for the “How are projects under this program advanced for implementation” section:

For projects advanced for implementation and inclusion in the Sign Replacement and Improvement program, 

NMDOT issues a call for projects to Districts. Based on responses, then a list of those projects is reviewed and 

compiled. NMDOT submits the list to the FHWA Division Office for review/approval. The projects approved by 

this process are advanced for implementation.

What percentage of HSIP funds address systemic improvements?

 8.1 

 HSIP funds are used to address which of the following systemic improvements? Please check all that 

apply.

Other-Pedestrian Safety

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In 2014, New Mexico had the highest pedestrian fatality rate per capita of all 50 states, and in 2015, based on 

preliminary data, still ranked in the highest six states. In 2016 and 2017 New Mexico pedestrian fatalities and 

serious injuries continued an upward trend compared to prior years. For this reason and historical concerns, 

New Mexico is designated as a Pedestrian Safety Focus State by the FHWA.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? [Check all that apply]

Engineering Study 

Road Safety Assessment

Crash data analysis

Stakeholder input 

Other-SHSP/Local road safety plan

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 15 of 54

NMDOT is currently conducting a network screening process to identify high pedestrian crash locations 

statewide. This effort, using HSM Part B techniques, will provide a list of sites based on crash frequency that 

will facilitate a more focused approach in diagnosis, countermeasure development, and ultimately the 

development of projects using a data driven approach based on crash data.

The pedestrian safety projects in the FFY 2017 HSIP program focus on improved training of law enforcement 

officers relating to crash reporting, improvement of crash system management, system planning, and 

intersection improvements that enhance pedestrian safety.

The pedestrian safety projects in the FFY 2017 HSIP program focus on improved training of law enforcement 

officers relating to crash reporting, improvement of crash system management, system planning, and 

intersection improvements that enhance pedestrian safety.

Does the State HSIP consider connected vehicles and ITS technologies? 

Yes

Describe how the State HSIP considers connected vehicles and ITS technologies. 

The NMDOT HSIP includes four ITS projects in the FFY 2017 program. The HSIP funds obligated for these 

projects is $466,000. The ITS projects are primarily oriented to improvements in data collection, traffic and 

safety management on a system-wide basis. Secondly, the projects will provide ITS technology to mitigate and 

possibly prevent secondary crash types and disseminate road condition advisories to the traveling public.

At this time the HSIP program does not consider safety initiatives related to connected vehicle technologies.

Does the State use the Highway Safety Manual to support HSIP efforts?

Yes

Please describe how the State uses the HSM to support HSIP efforts.

HSM methods are being used to develop an enhanced safety analysis process consistent with HSM 

approaches outlined in Part B. The network screening effort currently underway will focus initially on two-lane 

roads in rural and urban areas. This will include the development of a data set for similar groups of sites using 

a sliding window approach, e.g., for two lane rural roads. The data sets will be used to develop safety 

performance functions for each group in addition to applying Empirical Bayes (EB) methods to calculate the 

expected crash frequency. Sites will then be ranked based on the difference between the expected and 

predicted average crash frequency. The product will be a list of high crash sites that can be used to develop 

HSIP projects in future years. A similar list of high crash pedestrian sites will be used based on HSM Part B 

methods using a frequency-based method.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 16 of 54

Have any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP changed since the last reporting 

period?

Yes

Describe program methodology practices that have changed since the last reporting period.

See comments in Question #21.

Are there any other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate?

Yes

Describe other aspects of the HSIP methodology on which the State would like to elaborate.

NMDOT is currently working on the development of an HSIP Guide which is scheduled to be completed late in 

2018 or early 2019. Over the past year there has been internal discussions on the design and conduct of the 

HSIP program which has helped create an awareness of safety needs and long-term goals.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 17 of 54

Project Implementation

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for HSIP funding.

Federal Fiscal Year

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

FFY 2017

Enter the programmed and obligated funding for each applicable funding category.

FUNDING CATEGORY PROGRAMMED OBLIGATED % OBLIGATED/PROGRAMMED

HSIP (23 U.S.C. 148) $14,705,155 $23,992,000 163.15%

HRRR Special Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

$1,887,424 $1,887,424 100%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 154) $0 $0 0%

Penalty Funds (23 U.S.C. 164) $1,073,461 $1,495,235 139.29%

RHCP (for HSIP purposes) (23 

U.S.C. 130(e)(2))

$0 $0 0%

Other Federal-aid Funds (i.e. 

STBG, NHPP)

$0 $0 0%

State and Local Funds $0 $0 0%

Totals $17,666,040 $27,374,659 154.96%

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Notes:

1. Any project listed as some variation of 164 is included in the HSIP Section 164 Penalty Funds category.

2. Funding categories that have $0 inputs had funds programmed or obligated.

3. Some funding categories may have an obligated amount that is higher than the programmed amount. This is 

partially due to the fact that a project obligated in a prior fiscal year required a bid or letting adjustment in FFY 

2017, thus additional funds were obligated in FFY 2017.

How much funding is programmed to local (non-state owned and operated) or tribal safety projects?

$270,000 

How much funding is obligated to local or tribal safety projects?

$1,029,276 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 18 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Two CN values were identified as non-state projects. 

9900531

9900532

These two CN values and their programmed/obligated costs were summed and listed as the answer.

How much funding is programmed to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$1,523,461 

How much funding is obligated to non-infrastructure safety projects?

$2,393,589 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

The non-infrastructure projects funded with HSIP funds are related to: training of law enforcement officers to 

improve crash reporting and investigation; continued implementation of the E-Citation use, improvement of 

Traffic Records Coordinating Committee coordination and gap analysis; and continued development/execution 

of statewide safety planning efforts.

How much funding was transferred in to the HSIP from other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0% 

How much funding was transferred out of the HSIP to other core program areas during the reporting 

period under 23 U.S.C. 126?

0% 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

No transfers made.

Discuss impediments to obligating HSIP funds and plans to overcome this challenge in the future.

In some instances, project development and delivery took longer than originally anticipated which affected 

timing for obligation of funds for projects. It is anticipated that improvements in project scoping can help 

mitigate this issue.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 19 of 54

Does the State want to elaborate on any other aspects of it’s progress in implementing HSIP projects?

Yes

Describe any other aspects of the State’s progress in implementing HSIP projects on which the State 

would like to elaborate. 

The NMDOT HSIP Coordinator left the position in early 2018 and NMDOT has since hired a new coordinator 

who will start in fall of 2018. To augment efforts for the HSIP program and annual report preparation, NMDOT 

added consultant support.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 20 of 54

General Listing of Projects

List the projects obligated using HSIP funds for the reporting period.

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

9900531 Non-infrastructure Enforcement 1 E-CITATION AND 

CRASH SYSTEM 

SUPPORT AND 

EXPANSION

$759276 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

0 Non-crashrelatedData

9900532 Non-infrastructure Enforcement 1 PROVIDE 

TRAINING TO 

LAW 

ENFORCEMENT 

FOR CRASH 

FORMS

$270000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 Non-crashrelatedData

2100260 Roadway Roadway - other 11.998 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

784 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Lane Departure

4101090 Roadside Barrier - other 5.96088400000002 Miles $218259.54 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

10,791 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Prevention of 

animal crashes

4101130 6 Miles $44265.01 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

15,542 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot

6100850 Pedestrians and 

bicyclists

Miscellaneous pedestrians and 

bicyclists

1.287 Miles $296620.91 HRRR Special 

Rule (23 U.S.C. 

148(g)(1))

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

6,092 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Bicyclists

6101080 Roadway Roadway - other 6 Miles $1887424 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Major 

Collector

276 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

6101120 Roadside Barrier - other 6.0932 Miles $2073763.58 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

5,172 70 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Prevention of 

animal crashes

9900533 Non-infrastructure Data/traffic records 1 Traffic Records 

Coordinator

$0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

9900701 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

26.38 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

14,990 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900702 Intersection traffic 

control

Intersection traffic control - 

other

1 Intersections $102615.39 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

5,550 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

9900705 Lighting Intersection lighting 1 Interchanges $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

6,956 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Lighting

9900706 Roadside Barrier - other 7 Miles $18895.67 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

14,024 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900708 Roadside Barrier - other 134.5 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

16,954 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 21 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

9900709 Roadside Barrier - other 160.9 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

10,130 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900710 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

94.3 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,890 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900711 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

30.05 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

4,161 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900712 Lighting Intersection lighting 1 Intersections $10906.43 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

1,232 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

9900713 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or 

other

2 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,072 50 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900714 Roadway Roadway - other 0.600000000000023 Miles $9134.09 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

14,618 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900717 Roadway Pavement surface - high friction 

surface

0.5 Miles $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

21,293 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900721 Roadside Barrier - other 3 Miles $2639214.79 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

8,625 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900725 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Roadway signs and traffic 

control - other

118 Miles $771162.46 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

9,222 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900726 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

72.5 Miles $283466.2 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

4,022 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900727 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

160.9 Miles $321392.56 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

10,130 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900728 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

22.7 Miles $80206.6 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

4,760 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900729 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

17.8 Miles $77732.82 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

1,617 55 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades

9900730 Roadside Barrier - other 53.8 Miles $439957.91 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

23,194 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900731 Roadside Barrier - other 161 Miles $522187 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

10,130 75 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

9900732 Roadway signs 

and traffic control

Sign sheeting - upgrade or 

replacement

17.5 Miles $95908.64 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Minor 

Arterial

25,342 45 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Sign Upgrades
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 22 of 54

RELATIONSHIP TO SHSP

PROJECT 

NAME

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

SUBCATEGORY OUTPUTS OUTPUT TYPE HSIP PROJECT 

COST($)

TOTAL 

PROJECT 

COST($)

FUNDING 

CATEGORY

FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSIFICATION

AADT SPEED OWNERSHIP METHOD FOR 

SITE 

SELECTION

EMPHASIS 

AREA

STRATEGY

9900820 Non-infrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 MAINTAIN THE 

STATEWIDE 

CONTINUOUS 

COUNT STATION 

NETWORK

$132808 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

22,092 75 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

9900821 Non-infrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 MAINTAIN THE 

STATEWIDE 

CONTINUOUS 

COUNT STATION 

NETWORK

$135490.56 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

17,228 75 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

9900822 Non-infrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 MAINTAIN THE 

STATEWIDE 

CONTINUOUS 

COUNT STATION 

NETWORK

$64353.69 Penalty Funds 

(23 U.S.C. 164)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

13,335 75 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

9900824 Non-infrastructure Non-infrastructure - other 1 MAINTAIN THE 

STATEWIDE 

CONTINUOUS 

COUNT STATION 

NETWORK

$133306.95 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Interstate

17,937 75 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

A301790 Intersection 

geometry

Intersection geometrics - 

miscellaneous/other/unspecified

1 Intersections $540000 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Principal 

Arterial (UPA) - 

Other

13,894 35 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Intersections

E100160 Roadway Roadway - other 2.3 Miles $10190483.35 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Urban Minor 

Arterial

8,330 40 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Bicyclists

LC00240 Shoulder 

treatments

Widen shoulder - paved or 

other

8 Miles $4357472.64 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

Rural Principal 

Arterial (RPA) - 

Other

32,007 65 State Highway 

Agency

Spot Roadway 

Departure

S100270 0 Systemic $0 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Systemic Pedestrians

U900301 Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning 0 Transportation 

Safety Planning

$448354.08 HSIP (23 U.S.C. 

148)

0 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

U900380 Non-infrastructure Transportation safety planning 0 Transportation 

Safety Planning

$450000 0 State Highway 

Agency

Non-crashrelatedData

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Some data was not available for particular fields in the "Project Listing" table. Available data was inserted where possible.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 23 of 54

Safety Performance

General Highway Safety Trends

Present data showing the general highway safety trends in the State for the past five years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatalities 366 361 349 350 366 311 386 298 402

Serious Injuries 1,940 1,899 1,922 1,709 1,624 1,314 1,249 1,329 1,153

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.390 1.390 1.380 1.360 1.430 1.240 1.520 1.090 1.446

Serious injury rate (per 

HMVMT)

7.380 7.300 7.600 6.660 6.353 5.238 4.928 4.844 4.146

Number non-motorized 

fatalities

46 43 41 44 68 55 80 61 80

Number of non-motorized 

serious injuries

129 118 118 113 89 120 118 156 109

non-motorized fatalities and 

serious injuries

175 161 159 157 157 175 198 217 191
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 24 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Fatalities

Fatalities 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Annual Serious Injuries

Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 25 of 54

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Fatality rate (per HMVMT)

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 26 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Fatalities Data Source: FARS Query (2008-2016) using Person Type: (5) Pedestrian, (6) Bicyclist, (7) Other 

cyclist, and (8) Persons on Personal Conveyances.

0

50

100

150

200

250

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Non Motorized Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.

0

50

100

150

200

250

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries

non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries 5 Year Rolling Avg.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 27 of 54

A-Injury Data Source: (NMDOT) Federal Fiscal Year 2019 Performance Measure 1 Targets Report dated July 

16, 2018.

Describe fatality data source.

FARS

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

None

To the maximum extent possible, present this data by functional classification and ownership.

Year 2016

Functional Classification Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Interstate

59 90.4 1.33 20.3

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0 0 0 0

Rural Principal Arterial 

(RPA) - Other

54.2 88.2 1.59 2.61

Rural Minor Arterial 29.6 63.2 1.85 4.03

Rural Minor Collector 8.8 16 1.6 2.92

Rural Major Collector 35 61.8 2.6 4.69

Rural Local Road or Street 20 44.6 0.51 1.15

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Interstate

15.8 55 0.6 2.09

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other Freeways 

and Expressways

0.2 1.2 0.15 0.89

Urban Principal Arterial 

(UPA) - Other

62.4 410.6 1.64 10.6

Urban Minor Arterial 15.4 161.4 1 10.3

Urban Minor Collector 0.8 1.6 0.37 0.74

Urban Major Collector 2 11.4 0.22 1.24

Urban Local Road or Street 20.4 155.8 1.32 9.75
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 28 of 54

Year 2016

Roadways Number of Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

State Highway Agency 238.4 606.6 1.45 3.7

County Highway Agency 26.4 108.8 0.56 2.33

Town or Township 

Highway Agency

0 0 0 0

City of Municipal Highway 

Agency

61.6 536.2 1.16 10.13

State Park, Forest, or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Local Park, Forest or 

Reservation Agency

0 0 0 0

Other State Agency 0 0 0

Other Local Agency 0 0 0

Private (Other than 

Railroad)

0.2 0.2 0 0

Railroad 0 0 0 0

State Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Local Toll Authority 0 0 0 0

Other Public 

Instrumentality (e.g. 

Airport, School, University)

0 0 0 0

Indian Tribe Nation 0 0 0 0

BIA/Tribal 10.8 7.4 1.78 1.22

City or Municipal Highway 

Agency

0 0 0 0

BIA/Tribal 0 0 0 0

City or Municipal Highway 

Agency

0 0 0 0

BIA/Tribal 0 0 0 0
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 29 of 54

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Functional Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 30 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

500

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 31 of 54

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 32 of 54

0

5

10

15

20

25

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Functional 

Classification 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 33 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities by Roadway Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 34 of 54

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 35 of 54

0

0.2

0.4

0.6

0.8

1

1.2

1.4

1.6

1.8

2

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 36 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In the 2017 FHWA Annual Report, the 2016 preliminary crash data was used. Data from 2016 was used again 

in the 2018 Annual Report, but this time the data was finalized - not preliminary. For this reason, the numbers 

will reflect 2016 results in both the 2017 and 2018 Annual Reports, but the values will be different due to the 

difference of using preliminary data and finalized data (the differences were noticeable between the two 2016 

dataset).

Differing entries for Functional Class appear in FARS, HPMS, and NMDOT crash data. This leads to 

inconsistencies in comparison and analysis of data. NMDOT took the position to try and have consistency with 

HPMS and NMDOT data as this provided an ability to calculate both crash data and rates.

Any ownership or functional class category that was not used was given inputs of zero in all four performance 

measure columns.

Notes for the 'Ownership' inputs:

1. Any variation of Federal Agency was not reported due to the following: NPS does not report any crashes to 

NMDOT, US Forest Service does not have a data base for crashes, nor does Game and Fish.

2. The fatality rate and serious injury rate for "Private (other than railroad)" are zero due to the VMT being 

unknown for that particular ownership category.

Are there any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which the State would like to 

elaborate?

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) by Roadway 

Ownership 

5 Year Average

2008-2012 2009-2013 2010-2014 2011-2015 2012-2016
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 37 of 54

Yes

Provide additional discussion related to general highway safety trends.

See inputs in the comments section for each performance target.

Safety Performance Targets

Safety Performance Targets

Calendar Year 2019 Targets * 

Number of Fatalities 375.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five-year average fatalities fell by 7 percent between 2011 and 2015, but then rose in 

2016 to their highest level in ten years. 2017 preliminary data and 2018 and 2019 

projected data indicate fatalities remaining high. Although the 5- year trend line 

indicates a 5 percent increase in overall fatalities from 2016 to 2019, given the 

projected increases in pedestrian, speeding and alcohol-impaired fatalities, the State 

has determined a 6.4 percent increase in overall fatalities to be an achievable target in 

2019. 

Number of Serious Injuries 1100.0 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five-year average serious injuries are projected to fall by 14.7 percent between 2016 

and 2018, and the State anticipates a continued reduction in serious injuries in 2019. 

The State has determined a 17.5 percent reduction in these injuries from 2016 to 2019 

is achievable. 

Fatality Rate 1.318 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Although five-year average fatalities are expected to increase in 2019 from 2016, with 

VMT expected to continue rising, the State determines that the projected 2019 fiveyear fatality rate is an achievable target. 

Serious Injury Rate 3.825 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 38 of 54

Five-year average serious injury rates are projected to continue falling, and the State 

has determined the 2019 five-year average projection to be an achievable target. 

Total Number of Non-Motorized 

Fatalities and Serious Injuries 220.6 

Describe the basis for established target, including how it supports SHSP goals. 

Five-year average non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries are projected to rise 

over the next four years, and the State has determined the 2019 five-year average 

projection to be an achievable target. 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

These targets are taken from the "NM DOT Performance Measure (PM) Target Report - PM 1; Federal Fiscal 

Year 2019" PDF document.

Describe efforts to coordinate with other stakeholders (e.g. MPOs, SHSO) to establish safety performance 

targets. 

As part of the process of establishing safety performance targets, in 2018 there was a day-long workshop 

presenting relevant considerations such as past performance, current trends -nationally/statewide/locally, and 

anticipated future trends in safety performance related to the five measures. These were discussed in detail 

and stakeholders discussed their experiences related to the process to determine the safety targets for 2019. 

Does the State want to report additional optional targets? 

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Consistent with the SHSP, the NMDOT will continue to focus on reducing fatalities and serious injuries in New 

Mexico, with consideration of guidance provided by the FHWA, and federal legislation. 

Applicability of Special Rules

Does the HRRR special rule apply to the State for this reporting period? 

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

New Mexico is subject to complying with the High Risk Rural Road (HRRR) Special Rule beginning with the 

2018 reporting cycle. Consistent with the federal criteria for development of a project that addresses the HRRR 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 39 of 54

special rule, NMDOT programmed and obligated a project which incorporates multiple safety countermeasures 

on NM 117 (CN 6101080) which is classified as a Rural Major Collector for $1,887,424. This project will 

address a number of safety risks particularly related to road departure crashes which is consistent with the 

Road Departure HSIP program defined earlier. Following FHWA recommended approaches, countermeasures 

were incorporated, such as rumble strips, application of a high friction surface treatment at key locations, and 

improvements to culvert end treatments, and other fixed object hazard mitigations. This project is included in 

the list of HSIP projects for FFY 2017. Effectiveness evaluation is not possible in the initial year due to data 

limitations and crash data not being available.

Provide the number of older driver and pedestrian fatalities and serious injuries 65 years of age and 

older for the past seven years.

PERFORMANCE 

MEASURES 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Fatalities

31 35 50 30 29 29 44

Number of Older Driver and 

Pedestrian Serious Injuries

139 102 106 141 114 104 91

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

1. 

Older driver fatalities were obtained from FARS; K Injury = Severity, Age 65+, Person Type: Driver of 

motorized transport 

2. Older pedestrian fatalities were obtained from FARS: K Injury Severity, Age 65+, Person Type: 

Pedestrian 

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016

# of Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Years

Number of Older Driver and Pedestrian Fatalities and Serious Injuries by 

Year.

Fatalities Serious Injuries
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 40 of 54

3. Older driver/older pedestrian serious (A) injuries were obtained from the NM State Crash Data - Vehicle 

level which has the person information of all units involved in the crash. Vehicle Data is filtered by 

vehicle type ('TypeV' = 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8) and Age (65
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 41 of 54

Evaluation

Program Effectiveness

How does the State measure effectiveness of the HSIP?

Change in fatalities and serious injuries

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Safety performance effectiveness is measured based on a review of the five PM 1 measures. This review is 

conducted annually with a coordinated effort including MPOs, Regional Transportation Planning Organizations 

(RTPOs), Traffic Safety Division, and the SPB.

Based on the measures of effectiveness selected previously, describe the results of the State's program 

level evaluations.

Assessment of safety performance effectiveness for the 2019 HSIP Annual Report was based on a 

comprehensive review of crash data, and trends using the state’s crash data base. Overall, based on current 

trends, fatalities are on an upward trend and NMDOT has set an objective to limit the increase from 2016 

through 2019 to 6.4 percent. The number of serious injuries, the fatality rate, and serious injury rate are 

anticipated to decline from 2016 through 2019. The number of non-motorized fatalities and serious injuries are 

on an upward trend and NMDOT has set an objective to limit the increase to 220.6.

What other indicators of success does the State use to demonstrate effectiveness and success of the 

Highway Safety Improvement Program?

Policy change 

Increased awareness of safety and data-driven process

HSIP Obligations 

Other-Development of improved HSIP internal and external procedures 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

For FFY 2017 the obligation of HSIP funds continues to be successfully achieved compared to past years. 

There has been an increased focus on development and obligation of projects related to the mitigation of road 

departure crashes which is consistent with SHSP objectives and that road departure fatalities were ranked the 

highest of all identified Emphasis Areas. In 2018 NMDOT initiated efforts to develop an HSIP Manual and to 

develop a data driven process for network screening and identification of high risk sites, both of which are 

based on HSM guidance.

Are there any significant programmatic changes that have occurred since the last reporting period? 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 42 of 54

No

Effectiveness of Groupings or Similar Types of Improvements

Present and describe trends in SHSP emphasis area performance measures.

Year 2012 

SHSP Emphasis Area Targeted Crash 

Type

Number of 

Fatalities

(5-yr avg)

Number of Serious 

Injuries

(5-yr avg)

Fatality Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Serious Injury Rate

(per HMVMT)

(5-yr avg)

Roadway Departure 194.8 581.2 0.76 2.25

Pedestrians 10.5 73.8 0.16 0.29

Bicyclists 5.8 38.6 0.02 0.15

Older Drivers 49.4 196.8 0.19 0.89

Motorcyclists

Speeding and Aggressive 

Driving

125.4 335.2 0.49 1.3

Non-use of Safety Restraints 78.4 80.4 0.3 0.31

Driver Inattention 163 845.6 0.63 3.28

Young Drivers 40.2 73.8 0.16 0.29

Heavy Vehicles 40.4 80.6 0.16 0.31

Impaired Driving 135.6 227.8 0.53 0.88

Inclement Weather 32 105.6 0.12 0.41

Rail 5.8 1.6 0.02 0.01

Animals and Wildlife 3 13 0.01 0.05

Tribal Lands 26.6 42 0.1 0.16
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 43 of 54

0

50

100

150

200

250

Fatalities

Number of Fatalities 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

800

900

1000

Serious Injuries

Number of Serious Injuries 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 44 of 54

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Source: New Mexico Strategic Highway Safety Plan (March 2017)

Data are shown as five-year rolling averages.

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

Fatality Rate

Fatality Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012

0

0.5

1

1.5

2

2.5

3

3.5

4

Serious Injury Rate

Serious Injury Rate (per HMVMT) 

5 Year Average

2004-2008 2005-2009 2006-2010 2007-2011 2008-2012
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 45 of 54

Data are reported for Years 2008-2012.

Data shown are fatal and serious injury crashes (class A).

The Driver Inattention emphasis area includes distracted driving and sleepy/fatigued driving crashes.

Has the State completed any countermeasure effectiveness evaluations during the reporting period?

No

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

For the reporting period, NMDOT focused on improvement of essential data that can be used to more 

effectively identify sites of concern such as better roadway attribute data, travel data, and crash data 

refinements. The improvement of these key data attributes will improve the ability to identify sites of concern 

and projects, develop improved safety programs, and incorporate effective systemic initiatives. This will lead to 

the implementation of more effective and proven safety countermeasures/initiatives that can be evaluated and 

are anticipated to provide positive results when evaluated. 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 46 of 54

Project Effectiveness

Provide the following information for previously implemented projects that the State evaluated this reporting period. 

LOCATION FUNCTIONAL 

CLASS

IMPROVEMENT 

CATEGORY

IMPROVEMENT 

TYPE

PDO

BEFORE

PDO

AFTER

FATALITY

BEFORE

FATALITY

AFTER

SERIOUS 

INJURY

BEFORE

SERIOUS 

INJURY

AFTER

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

BEFORE

ALL OTHER 

INJURY

AFTER

TOTAL

BEFORE

TOTAL

AFTER

EVALUATION 

RESULTS

(BENEFIT/COST 

RATIO)

No projects 

evaluated

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

Are there any other aspects of the overall HSIP effectiveness on which the State would like to elaborate?

No
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 47 of 54

Compliance Assessment

What date was the State’s current SHSP approved by the Governor or designated State representative?

 03/01/2017 

What are the years being covered by the current SHSP?

From: 2017 To: 2021 

When does the State anticipate completing it’s next SHSP update?

 2021 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

None

Provide the current status (percent complete) of MIRE fundamental data elements collection efforts using the table below. 

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

ROADWAY SEGMENT

Segment Identifier (12) 1 1 1 0.5 1 0.5

Route Number (8) 1 0.75

Route/Street Name (9) 0.99 0.1

Federal Aid/Route Type 

(21)

1 1

Rural/Urban Designation 

(20)

1 1 1 1

Surface Type (23) 0.95 0.95 0.95 0

Begin Point Segment 

Descriptor (10)

1 1 1 0.5 0.99 0.5

End Point Segment 

Descriptor (11)

1 1 1 0.5 0.99 0.5

Segment Length (13) 1 1

Direction of Inventory (18) 1 1

Functional Class (19) 1 1 1 1 1 1

Median Type (54) 0.8 0.5
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 48 of 54

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Access Control (22) 1 1

One/Two Way Operations 

(91)

0.99 0.99

Number of Through Lanes 

(31)

0.9 0.9 0.99 0.85

Average Annual Daily 

Traffic (79)

1 1 1 1

AADT Year (80) 1 1

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

1 0.8 1 0.2 1 0.2

INTERSECTION

Unique Junction Identifier 

(120)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 1 Crossing Point 

(122)

0 0

Location Identifier for 

Road 2 Crossing Point 

(123)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Geometry (126)

0 0

Intersection/Junction 

Traffic Control (131)

0 0

AADT for Each 

Intersecting Road (79)

0.8 0.8

AADT Year (80) 1 1

Unique Approach 

Identifier (139)

0 0

INTERCHANGE/RAMP

Unique Interchange 

Identifier (178)

1 1

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Beginning of 

Ramp Terminal (197)

1 1

Location Identifier for 

Roadway at Ending Ramp 

Terminal (201)

1 1

Ramp Length (187) 1 1

Roadway Type at 

Beginning of Ramp 

Terminal (195)

1 1
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 49 of 54

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - SEGMENT

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - INTERSECTION

NON LOCAL PAVED

ROADS - RAMPS LOCAL PAVED ROADS UNPAVED ROADS

MIRE NAME (MIRE NO.) STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE STATE NON-STATE

Roadway Type at End 

Ramp Terminal (199)

1 1

Interchange Type (182) 0 0

Ramp AADT (191) 1 1

Year of Ramp AADT (192) 1 1

Functional Class (19) 1 1

Type of Governmental 

Ownership (4)

1 1

Totals (Average Percent 

Complete):

0.98 0.89 0.23 0.23 0.91 0.91 0.99 0.62 1.00 0.54

*Based on Functional Classification

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

None

Describe actions the State will take moving forward to meet the requirement to have complete access to the MIRE fundamental data elements on all public roads by September 30, 2026.

FY18 Performance Measure: Integration

ALL Roads Network of Linear Referenced Data (ARNOLD) Phase 2 project includes the development of the NMDOT Roadway Inventory System. The system will house the Roadway Data Attributes that will be spatially represented. The 

Linear Referencing system will be able to locate and display the roadway data attributes on a map. The Phase 2 project will entail full integration and implementation of the ESRI Roads and Highways including the migration of data from 

NMDOT’s existing Transportation Information Management System (TIMS) into the ESRI Roads and Highways Data Model. Expected completion date is August 2018.

Achievement: The ARNOLD Phase I project encompassed the development of the Geo Spatial representation of the NMDOT Linear Reference System to include the National Highway System, State Owned and Maintained Roads, Local 

Roads, and Federal Roads. NMDOT now has geo spatial representation on 77,204.708 miles of roadway.

Model Inventory of Roadway Elements (MIRE) Fundamental Data Elements

The NMDOT Data Management Bureau is currently developing the NMDOT Roadway Inventory System and the Transportation Data Management System. These two databases will include the tables that will house the MIRE 

Fundamental data element attributes. The Roadway Inventory System completion date is August 30, 2018 and completion date for the Transportation Data Management System is December 30, 2017. A number of the MIRE elements are 

currently collected for the annual HPMS report. Once the databases are developed NMDOT will develop a second phase for the MIRE project. The third phase will include a plan for the data collection that is required.

Current Status of MIRE Fundamental Data Element Collection:

• MIRE Data Fundamental Data Elements (FDE) Table 1 currently collected: 

o FDE Roadway Segment: all listed FDEs are collected on Functional System 1-6U. 

o FDE Intersection: MIRE Elements 131, 79, 80, are currently collected on Functional System 1-6U. The following MIRE elements are not collected: 120,122, 123, 126, and 139. The Data Management Bureau is currently 

developing a plan to build an intersection application. Funding will be required. 

o Interchange/Ramp FDE MIRE elements currently collected on Functional System 1-6U: 178, 197, 201, 187, 191, 192, 19, 4 

o Not collected: 195, 199, 182 

• MIRE Data Fundamental Data Elements (FDE) Table 2 currently collected: 

o FDEs in Table 2 are based on Functional System 6R -7. Place holders for these data items exist in the Roadway Inventory System. A plan for data collection will need to be discussed and funding for associated data 

collection will need to be considered. 
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 50 of 54

• Which office(s) in the state DOT collect, receive, and maintain the MIRE Fundamental data elements. How are they stored and managed? 

o The Data Management Bureau within the Asset Management and Planning Division is currently developing the Roadway Inventory System that will house the collected MIRE FDEs. 

• Who can access the MIRE FDE for safety analyses, and what steps are necessary to access the data? Are systems planned or already implemented to facilitate access to the data, e.g. online portals? 

o The ARNOLD Phase 2 project is currently developing the Roadway Inventory System to house the MIRE FDE. The ARNOLD phase 3 project will be the next step in data integration between systems and will provide 

accessibility to end users. 

• Which agency/ office/ individual/ committee(s) have authority and responsible for determining the improvements needed to achieve compliance with the MIRE FDE requirements? 

o The Asset Management and Planning Division Data Management Bureau and the NMDOT Safety Committee. 

Coordination with Other Agencies

For MIRE fundamental data elements that are NOT currently being collected:

• Who owns the roads where the elements are not being collected (e.g., State, local government agencies, Tribal Governments, Federal land Management Agencies, etc.)? 

o The NMDOT ARNOLD Phase 1 network developed the Linear Referencing System to include all roads. A plan to reconcile the ownership of the roadways will need to be established by the Roadway Inventory Program. 

This will verify the ownership of the roadways that are not owned or maintained by NMDOT. 

• Do the agencies that own those roads collect any of the MIRE fundamental data elements? 

o The Metropolitan Planning Organizations collect Traffic Data Elements associated with the MIRE FDE. 

• What Mechanisms are needed to share data among those agencies that collect, store, and maintain and use the MIRE FDE. 

o A primary key that will link data between systems and data collection standards. 

Prioritization criteria for collecting MIRE Fundamental Data Elements on All Public Roads

For additional data that need to be collected to meet the MIRE Fundamental data element requirement:

• What data elements will be collected in the short (1-3 years), medium (4-6 years), and long (7-9 year) terms? 

o If the FDE has a one to one HPMS relationship it is collected on the 1-3 year cycle. 

o A plan will need to be established for the FDEs that are not collected with annual HPMS data collection. 

• What collection technologies and/or methodologies are anticipated to be used? 

o NMDOT currently utilizes a LIDAR data collection methodology. NMDOT also has a photo log of all Federal Aid System roads. 

• Who is responsible for collecting the data? 

o The Asset Management and Planning Division. 

• What will be an update cycle for the data collection of the data? 

o Once the new Roadway Inventory System is established and ready to house data, a plan for data collection will be developed. 

Costs and Resources for Data Collection

• What are the estimated cost, staffing and other resource requirements to collect and maintain the MIRE Fundamental Data Elements? 

o NMDOT will have to establish a plan associated with the cost, staffing and other resources to collect and maintain the MIRE FDE. 

• Who will incur those costs? 

o NMDOT will have to establish a plan and seek funding in order to collect and maintain the data. 

MIRE Data Collection Guidebook U.S. DOT FHWA Report No. FHWA-SA-13-009

NHSTA 2016 Traffic Records Assessment Roadway Recommendations:

• Improve the data dictionary for the Roadway data systems to reflect best practices identified in the Traffic Records Program Assessment Advisory. 

o NMDOT is currently developing the Roadway Inventory System to meet best practices and will include the data dictionary schema. Completion date is August 30, 2018. 

• Improve the data quality control program for the Roadway Data system to reflect best practices identified in the Traffic Records Program Assessment Advisory. 

The NMDOT Data Management Bureau is currently developing a new roadway inventory system that will apply validation rules and conflict avoidance. The system will include an HPMS tool box that will ensure data compliance per FHWA 

standards regarding consistency and cross validations. The data reviewer which is a COT QA/QC tool will be used to identify geometry and database errors. The new system’s straight-line diagram tool will identify gaps and overlap and 

help with consistency of roadway inventory items. ESRI Roads and Highways also has built in QA/QC checks for validating the network. Completion date is August 30, 2018.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 51 of 54

Provide the suspected serious injury identifier, definition and attributes used by the State for both the crash report form and the crash database using the table below. Please also indicate whether or not these elements are 

compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition criteria for data element P5. Injury Status, suspected serious injury. 

CRITERIA SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY 

IDENTIFIER(NAME) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY DEFINITION MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * SUSPECTED SERIOUS INJURY ATTRIBUTES(DESCRIPTORS) MMUCC 4TH EDITION COMPLIANT * 

Crash Report Form "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Report Form Instruction Manual "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes Any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following: [See 

Attributes]

Yes *Severe laceration resulting in exposure of

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in 

significant loss of blood

*Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

 *Crush injuries

*Suspected skull, chest, or abdominal 

injury other 

than bruises or minor lacerations

*Significant burns (second and third degree 

burns 

over 10% or more of the body)

*Unconsciousness when taken from the 

crash scene

*Paralysis

Yes

Crash Database "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes N/A Yes N/A Yes

Crash Database Data Dictionary "Code A" or "Class A injury" Yes Any injury other than fatal that results in 

one or more of the following:[See 

Attributes]

Yes Severe laceration resulting in exposure of 

underlying tissues/muscle/organs or 

resulting in significant loss of blood

Broken or distorted extremity (arm or leg)

Crush injuries

Suspected skull, chest, or abdominal injury 

other than bruises or minor lacerations

Significant burns (second and third degree 

burns over 10% or more of the body)

Unconsciousness when taken from the 

crash scene

Paralysis

Yes

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.

In summary, the NMDOT updated the “Crash-level Data Dictionary and User’s Guide” and uniform crash report in July 2017 are considered compliant with the MMUCC 4th edition.

Did the State conduct an HSIP program assessment during the reporting period?

No

When does the State plan to complete it’s next HSIP program assessment.

2019 

Enter additional comments here to clarify your response for this question or add supporting information.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 52 of 54

The State does not currently have any plans to complete its next HSIP program assessment. At this time, the State is focused on using good techniques to identify projects and corresponding countermeasures that are appropriate which 

results in reduction of fatalities and serious injuries.
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 53 of 54

Optional Attachments

Program Structure:

Project Implementation:

Safety Performance:

Evaluation: 

Compliance Assessment:
2018 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

Page 54 of 54

Glossary

5 year rolling 

average 

means the average of five individuals, consecutive annual points of data (e.g. annual 

fatality rate). 

Emphasis area means a highway safety priority in a State’s SHSP, identified through a data-driven, 

collaborative process. 

Highway safety 

improvement 

project 

means strategies, activities and projects on a public road that are consistent with a State 

strategic highway safety plan and corrects or improves a hazardous road location or 

feature or addresses a highway safety problem. 

HMVMT means hundred million vehicle miles traveled. 

Non-infrastructure 

projects 

are projects that do not result in construction. Examples of non-infrastructure projects 

include road safety audits, transportation safety planning activities, improvements in the 

collection and analysis of data, education and outreach, and enforcement activities. 

Older driver special 

rule 

applies if traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over 

the age of 65 in a State increases during the most recent 2-year period for which data are 

available, as defined in the Older Driver and Pedestrian Special Rule Interim Guidance 

dated February 13, 2013. 

Performance 

measure 

means indicators that enable decision-makers and other stakeholders to monitor changes 

in system condition and performance against established visions, goals, and objectives. 

Programmed funds mean those funds that have been programmed in the Statewide Transportation 

Improvement Program (STIP) to be expended on highway safety improvement projects. 

Roadway 

Functional 

Classification 

means the process by which streets and highways are grouped into classes, or systems, 

according to the character of service they are intended to provide. 

Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP) 

means a comprehensive, multi-disciplinary plan, based on safety data developed by a 

State Department of Transportation in accordance with 23 U.S.C. 148. 

Systematic refers to an approach where an agency deploys countermeasures at all locations across a 

system. 

Systemic safety 

improvement 

means an improvement that is widely implemented based on high risk roadway features 

that are correlated with specific severe crash types. 

Transfer 

means, in accordance with provisions of 23 U.S.C. 126, a State may transfer from an 

apportionment under section 104(b) not to exceed 50 percent of the amount apportioned 

for the fiscal year to any other apportionment of the State under that section.