New Mexico

Highway Safety Improvement Program

2013 Annual Report

Prepared by: NM
ii

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.”
iii

Table of Contents

Disclaimer...................................................................................................................................................... ii

Executive Summary.......................................................................................................................................1

Introduction ..................................................................................................................................................4

Program Structure ........................................................................................................................................4

Program Administration ...........................................................................................................................4

Program Methodology..............................................................................................................................6

Progress in Implementing Projects.............................................................................................................26

Funds Programmed............................................................................................................................. 27

General Listing of Projects.................................................................................................................. 30

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets....................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Overview of General Safety Trends....................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Application of Special Rules................................................................... Error! Bookmark not defined.

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program Evaluation) ..........................................58

SHSP Emphasis Areas............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Groups of similar project types.............................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Systemic Treatments ............................................................................. Error! Bookmark not defined.

Glossary.......................................................................................................................................................83
iv
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

1

Executive Summary

Answer:

One can commonly categorize highway safety into three elements: Driver/Pedestrian Vehicle, 

and the Roadway. One can also categorize traffic safety programs into four functional groups: 

Education (of the driver/pedestrian/ bicyclist), Enforcement (of traffic and vehicle related laws), 

Emergency Medical Response (to a traffic crash involving injuries and fatalities), and 

Engineering (physical improvements to facilities or systems that improve the safety of the 

transportation network). The NM Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) is a data-driven, 

strategic approach that addresses the highway element and the engineering functional group as 

part of a more comprehensive transportation safety program operated by others both within 

and outside of the New Mexico Department of Transportation (NMDOT). 

All 68,384 centerline miles of public roadways in New Mexico are subject to analysis for safety 

issues by the NM HSIP. The latest estimate (based on Table HM 20 of FHWA Statistics 2010, 

published December 2011) of the universe of public roadway centerline miles in New Mexico, 

stratified by functional class is as follows:

Roadway Functional Classification

Rural Urban Total (Centerline Miles)

Interstates

848 152 1,000

Other Freeways & Expressways

0 5 5
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

2

Other Principal Arterials

1,856 695 2,551

Minor Arterials

1,949 638 2,587

Rural Major Collectors

3,916 0 3,916

Rural Minor Collectors

3,140 0 3,140

Functionally Local Roadways

48,761 5,002 53,763

Urban Collectors

0 1,416 1,416

NM Total Public Roadways

60,470 7,908 68,378

The NM HSIP operates in compliance with the current federal surface transportation act in 

effect, Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21), and the latest set of 

Hazard Elimination Program regulations promulgated by the Federal Highway Administration 

that are authorized by Section 148 of MAP-21. 

The NM HSIP also operates in compliance with the multi-agency New Mexico Comprehensive 

Transportation Safety Plan (NM CTSP). The NM CTSP is a jointly sponsored, multiple State of 

New Mexico agency document which addresses the requirements for a Strategic Highway 

Safety Plan (SHSP) as mandated under MAP-21. It was originally adopted in August 2006 with 

an update adopted in December 2010. The NM CTSP was further amended in December 2011 

and March 2012. The NM CTSP also fulfills the 23 USC 148 statutory requirement that the NM 

HSIP must develop and implement a State strategic highway safety plan. The NM CTSP is a 

multi-modal, umbrella type strategic plan that describes proposed high priority traffic safety 

countermeasures as strategies that are intended to achieve the plan’s goal to fatalities to 

motorists, transit riders, bicyclists, and pedestrians on New Mexico’s surface transportation 

network. The NM CTSP as updated now has the goal of reducing total crash fatalities from Year 

2008 to Year 2030 by fifty percent. The Year 2008 magnitude of annual fatalities is calculated as 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

3

the past five-year (2004 to 2008) average or 455, and thus the Year 2030 goal of fifty percent 

fewer annual fatalities is then calculated to be 227. The NM CTSP contains explicit objectives to 

achieve this goal. The major NM CTSP Emphasis Areas that relate to the NM HSIP are: Reduce 

Lane Departure Crashes; Reduce Fatigued and Distracted Driving; Reduce Intersection-Related 

Crashes; and, Improve Safety for Special Road Users: Pedestrians, Cyclists, Motorcyclists, and 

Elder Drivers. 

The HSIP process is comprised of three main components: planning, implementation, and 

evaluation. The planning component includes processes for problem identification, 

countermeasure selection, and project selection. Implementation addresses project 

programming and funding distribution guidelines. Evaluation provides information for 

conducting before/after evaluations of locations where safety projects were constructed. The 

HSIP’s responsibility is to systematically analyze roadways utilizing crash data to identify 

roadway (state highway, tribal and county roads, city streets, etc.) locations, sections, and 

elements in New Mexico determined to be hazardous or forecasted with the likelihood of 

becoming hazardous to vehicular or pedestrian travel. From these analyses, suggested 

countermeasures in the form of safety improvement projects can be recommended, and 

Federal funding can be applied to implement them. The NM HSIP develops, prioritizes, and 

selects engineering roadway safety improvement projects on a statewide basis. The FHWA, 

New Mexico Division Office provides program oversight and Federal aid for these safety 

projects. In addition to state highways; tribal roads, city streets, and county roads are eligible 

for Federal aid safety projects.

All projects included in the New Mexico HSIP must conform to one of the emphasis area 

strategies outlined in the most recent version of the CTSP.
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

4

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 MAP-21 Reporting Guidance dated February 13, 2013 and consists 

of four sections: program structure, progress in implementing HSIP projects, 

progress in achieving safety performance targets, and assessment of the 

effectiveness of the improvements. 

Program Structure

Program Administration

How are Highway Safety Improvement Program funds allocated in a State? 

Central

District

Other

Describe how local roads are addressed as part of Highway Safety Improvement Program.

Answer:

Local city streets, county roads, and tribal roads are addressed in the same fashion as 

state highways.

Identify which internal partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

5

Design

Planning

Maintenance

Operations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Other: Other-NM DOT, Traffic Technical Support Bureau

Briefly describe coordination with internal partners. 

In November 2012 NMDOT Traffic Technical Support Bureau, HSIP Unit issued a statewide call 

for proposed safety project or non-construction safety program applications with documented 

evidence of safety hazards to justify funding the requested project or program for safety funds.

During December 2012 through April 2013 this unit reviewed new proposed safety project 

applications submitted by the following: Metropolitan Planning Organizations for metropolitan 

area local governments; Rural Transportation Planning Organizations for all other local 

government cities, counties and tribes from non-metropolitan regions, from NMDOT regional 

design offices, from six NMDOT District Offices, from NMDOT Rail and Transit Bureau, from 

NMDOT ITS Bureau, and from the NMDOT Traffic Records Section. In April 2013 the State 

Traffic Engineer, the Director of the Program Management Division, Director of the Traffic 

Safety Division, Deputy Secretary for Programs and Infrastructure and one District Engineer met 

as the NMDOT Safety Project Selection Committee and studied reviews and recommendations 

concerning the safety project applications. The NMDOT Safety Project Engineer and the FHWA 

New Mexico Division Safety/Pavement Engineer also attended the committee as advisory 

members. The committee selected which applications to reject and which ones to study 

further by initiating a road safety audit funded by the NM HSIP and which projects to 

recommend for approval and for forwarding to the FHWA New Mexico Division requesting 

concurrence for federal HSIP funding of the proposed safety projects or safety programs. For 

all the projects or programs that received concurrence, they were then programmed in 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

6

appropriate metropolitan Transportation Improvement Programs and the New Mexico State 

Transportation Improvement Program (STIP) to begin the HSIP safety project or safety program 

development and implementation phase. 

Identify which external partners are involved with Highway Safety Improvement Program planning. 

Metropolitan Planning Organizations

Governors Highway Safety Office

Local Government Association

Other: Other-NMDOT Traffic Safety Division; Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPO); Regional 

Planning Organizations (RPO); Tribal Governments; Municipalities; and Counties. 

Identify any program administration practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since 

the last reporting period.

Multi-disciplinary HSIP steering committee

Other: Other-As of July 1, 2012 soliciting statewide suggested conceptual safety projects was 

suspended by NMDOT General Office. It was re-instated in November 2012 and continued through June 

30, 2013.

Describe any other aspects of Highway Safety Improvement Program Administration on which you 

would like to elaborate.

No further information.

Program Methodology

Select the programs that are administered under the HSIP. 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

7

Median Barrier Intersection Safe Corridor

Horizontal Curve Bicycle Safety Rural State Highways

Skid Hazard Crash Data Red Light Running Prevention

Roadway Departure Low-Cost Spot Improvements Sign Replacement And 

Improvement

Local Safety Pedestrian Safety Right Angle Crash

Left Turn Crash Shoulder Improvement Segments

Other: 

Program: Median Barrier

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

8

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

Other-Systemic Improvements based on national research that median barriers can reduce cross 

median crashes by nearly 100%.

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

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other-NMDOT State Traffic Engineer approves automatically all reasonable freeway narrow median 

barrier system proposed safety projects immediately and forwards to FHWA NM Divsion for 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

9

concurrence.

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Intersection

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

10

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other-Pedestian Volume and 

Bicyclist Volume 

Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

11

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Bicycle Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

12

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other-Bicyclist involved 

crashes

Lane miles Roadside features

Other-Bicyclist volume Other-Current roadway lane 

width and bicycle lanes and 

designated bicycle routes

Other-Observed Bicyclist 

traffic from safety studies

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

13

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

14

Program: Rural State Highways

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other-High Risk Rural Road 

Network

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

15

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

16

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Roadway Departure

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

17

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

18

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Low-Cost Spot Improvements

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

19

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

20

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Local Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other Lane miles Roadside features
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

21

Other Other 

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

22

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

Program: Pedestrian Safety

Date of Program Methodology: 8/31/2012

 

What data types were used in the program methodology? 

Crashes Exposure Roadway

All crashes Traffic Median width
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

23

Fatal crashes only Volume Horizontal curvature

Fatal and serious injury 

crashes only

Population Functional classification

Other-Pedestrian involved 

crashes

Lane miles Roadside features

Other-Pedestrian traffic Other-Observed Pedestrian 

behavior from safety studies

What project identification methodology was used for this program? 

Crash frequency

Expected crash frequency with EB adjustment

Equivalent property damage only (EPDO Crash frequency)

EPDO crash frequency with EB adjustment

Relative severity index

Crash rate

Critical rate

Level of service of safety (LOSS)

Excess expected crash frequency using SPFs

Excess expected crash frequency with the EB adjustment

Excess expected crash frequency using method of moments

Probability of specific crash types

Excess proportions of specific crash types

Other 

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

Yes
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

24

No

If yes, are local road projects identified using the same methodology as state roads?

Yes

No

How are highway safety improvement projects advanced for implementation?

Competitive application process

selection committee

Other 

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).

Relative Weight in Scoring

Rank of Priority Consideration

Ranking based on B/C

Available funding 100

Incremental B/C

Ranking based on net benefit

Cost Effectiveness

What proportion of highway safety improvement program funds address systemic improvements? 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

25

5

Highway safety improvment program funds are used to address which of the following systemic 

improvments?

Cable Median Barriers Rumble Strips

Traffic Control Device Rehabilitation Pavement/Shoulder Widening

Install/Improve Signing Install/Improve Pavement Marking and/or 

Delineation

Upgrade Guard Rails Clear Zone Improvements

Safety Edge Install/Improve Lighting

Add/Upgrade/Modify/Remove Traffic Signal Other Other-Rumble stripes, pavement 

markings on top of existing shoulder rumble strips

Other Other-Install improved signs and striping 

on freeway exit ramps to reduce wrong way travel 

crashes on freeways

Other Other-Install ITS Type improvements on 

select regional work trip commuter corridors to 

reduce secondary crashes

Other Other-From our most recent funds 

programmed, 5% of highway safety improvement 

program funds were used to address systemic 

improvements.

What process is used to identify potential countermeasures? 

Engineering Study

Road Safety Assessment

Other: Other-Various analyses of the New Mexico surface transportation network are employed, 

where observations of current transportation operations, including current physical attributes, 

combined with various types of data including person trips, traffic volume
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

26

Other: Other-Resultant analyses may determine such statistics as crash frequency, crash rate or 

observed hazardous traffic conditions as a result of performance of an engineering safety study or road 

safety audit.

Identify any program methodology practices used to implement the HSIP that have changed since the 

last reporting period.

Highway Safety Manual

Road Safety audits

Systemic Approach

Other: Other-None

Describe any other aspects of the Highway Safety Improvement Program methodology on which you 

would like to elaborate. 

Beginning in July 2013 the New Mexico DOT is currently formulating a new set of proposed

New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program procedures affecting the methodology of 

seeking, reviewing, and forwarding for FHWA NM Division consideration for concurrence in 

funding proposed safety improvement projects or safety programs for programming and 

implementation. This new set of procedures propose to replace the current once a year formal 

review of proposed safety projects and programs with a continuous year round review and 

decision making by the NMDOT General Office Project Selection Committee and the NMDOT 

General Office Traffic Technical Support Bureau staff of proposed safety project and proposed 

safety program applications.

Progress in Implementing Projects
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

27

Funds Programmed

Reporting period for Highway Safety Improvement Program funding.

Calendar Year

State Fiscal Year

Federal Fiscal Year

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

Funding Category Programmed* Obligated

HSIP (Section 148) 22729203 97 % 12227202.17 100 %

HRRRP (SAFETEA-LU) 698000 3 % 0 0 %

HRRR Special Rule

Penalty Transfer -

Section 154

Penalty Transfer –

Section 164

Incentive Grants - 

Section 163

Incentive Grants (Section 

406)

Other Federal-aid Funds 

(i.e. STP, NHPP)

State and Local Funds

Totals 23427203 100% 12227202.17 100%
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

28

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

$4,896,023.00

How much funding is obligated to local safety projects?

$949,599.00

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

$0.00

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

$0.00

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

period?

$0.00

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

period? 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

29

$10,000,000.00

Discuss impediments to obligating Highway Safety Improvement Program funds and plans to 

overcome this in the future.

The primary impediment to implementing potential safety countermeasure strategies is always 

the associated cost and available funds. Although they cannot be determined until strategies 

are proposed, the NMDOT anticipates the following general impediments or difficulties (in 

addition to cost/ funding impediments) to successfully implementing potential safety 

strategies:

• Lack of favor or desirability with certain stakeholder groups such as the public or with 

particular road users’ interest groups that could limit or result in non-approval of the 

implementation of a strategy 

• Need for multi-agency coordination and cooperation

• Law enforcement prioritization processes and personnel shortages

• Inability to implement a safety strategy due to environmental impacts

• Incomplete and inaccurate crash reports and traffic volume counts for the off system 

county roads and tribal roads 

Describe any other aspects of the general Highway Safety Improvement Program implementation 

progress on which you would like to elaborate.

no further information
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

30

General Listing of Projects

List each highway safety improvement project obligated during the reporting period. 

Project Improvement 

Category 

Output HSIP 

Cost

Total 

Cost

Funding 

Category

Functional 

Classification

AADT Speed Roadway 

Ownership

Relationship to SHSP

Emphasis 

Area

Strategy

See 

attachment 

for list of 

Projects
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

31

Progress in Achieving Safety Performance Targets

Overview of General Safety Trends

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

Performance Measures* 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Number of fatalities 413 366 361 349 351

Number of serious injuries 1739 1820 1763 1806 1624

Fatality rate (per HMVMT) 1.67 1.48 1.47 1.44 1.36

Serious injury rate (per HMVMT) 7.03 7.35 7.2 7.48 6.27

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

32
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

33
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

34

To the maximum extent possible, present performance measure* data by functional classification and ownership. 

Year - 2012

Function Classification Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

RURAL PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

0 0 0 0

RURAL MINOR 

ARTERIAL

0 0 0 0

RURAL MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

RURAL MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

RURAL LOCAL ROAD OR 

STREET

0 0 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 0 0 0 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

35

ARTERIAL - INTERSTATE

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER 

FREEWAYS AND 

EXPRESSWAYS

0 0 0 0

URBAN PRINCIPAL 

ARTERIAL - OTHER

0 0 0 0

URBAN MINOR 

ARTERIAL

0 0 0 0

URBAN MINOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN MAJOR 

COLLECTOR

0 0 0 0

URBAN LOCAL ROAD 

OR STREET

0 0 0 0

OTHER 0 0 0 0

ALL FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSES COMBINED

371 0 1.46 0

ALL FUNCTIONAL 

CLASSES COMBINED

371 0 1.46 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

36
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

37
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

38
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

39
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

40

Year - 2012

Roadway Ownership Number of fatalities Number of serious injuries Fatality rate (per HMVMT) Serious injury rate (per HMVMT)

STATE HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

COUNTY HIGHWAY 

AGENCY

0 0 0 0

TOWN OR TOWNSHIP 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

0 0 0 0

CITY OF MUNICIPAL 

HIGHWAY AGENCY

0 0 0 0

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 0

OTHER LOCAL AGENCY 0 0 0 0

PRIVATE (OTHER 

THAN RAILROAD)

0 0 0 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

41

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

OTHER 0 0 0 0

ALL PUBLIC 

ROADWAYS

371 0 1.46 0

ALL PUBLIC 

ROADWAYS

371 0 1.46 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

42
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

43
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

44
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

45
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

46

Describe any other aspects of the general highway safety trends on which you would like to elaborate.

No further information.

Application of Special Rules

Present the rate of traffic fatalities and serious injuries per capita for drivers and pedestrians over the 

age of 65. 

Older Driver

Performance Measures

2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Fatality rate (per capita) 0.2 0.28 0.23 0.26 0

Serious injury rate (per 

capita)

0.92 0.81 1.05 0.75 0

Fatality and serious injury 

rate (per capita)

1.12 1.09 1.28 1 0

*Performance measure data is presented using a five-year rolling average.
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

47
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

48
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

49
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

50

Year Senior (65+) Fatalities 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

51

2007 39

2008 27
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

52

2009 37

2010 31

2011 35

5.47

1.1
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

53
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

54
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

55
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

56

year

Senior 

fatalities

Age 65+ 

population 

per 1000 

Total NM 

Population

Senior 

Fatality 

Rate per 

capita

Senior 

serious 

injuries 

Age 65+ 

population 

per 1000 

Total NM 

Population

Senior 

class A 

Serious 

Injury 

Rate per 

capita
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

57

2007 39 128 0.304688 87 128 0.679688

2008 27 132 0.204545 121 132 0.916667

2009 37 132 0.280303 107 132 0.810606

2010 31 135 0.22963 140 133 1.052632

2011 35 136 0.257353 102 136 0.75
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

58

Does the older driver special rule apply to your state? 

No

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the Improvements (Program 

Evaluation)

What indicators of success can you use to demonstrate effectiveness and success in the Highway 

Safety Improvement Program?

None

Benefit/cost

Policy change

Other: Other-Statewide reduction in number of fatalities and serious injuries
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

59

What significant programmatic changes have occurred since the last reporting period? 

Shift Focus to Fatalities and Serious Injuries

Include Local Roads in Highway Safety Improvement Program

Organizational Changes

None

Other: 
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

60

Briefly describe significant program changes that have occurred since the last reporting period. 

During the current reporting period of July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, the New Mexico DOT HSIP 

policies changed beginning in July 2012 by halting any further solicitation of proposed safety 

project applications from public agencies throughout the state, due to a poor set of applications 

received during early 2012. Then in December 2012 the policy changed again, to reinstating a 

policy of solicitation and accepting safety project applications from throughout the state, with a 

deadline of February 1, 2013 for site specific proposed projects or programs plus acceptance 

and review anytime for certain select proposed systemic safety improvement projects. As the 

reporting period ended on June 30, 2013, the NM HSIP began internal development work and 

discussions on changing the safety project application policy once again.

From July 1, 2013 through August 29, 2013 and continuing on into September 2013, the NM 

HSIP staff will work on revising the NM HSIP project application procedures to include a 

component where all Regional (non-metropolitan area) Transportation Planning 

Organizations (RTPOs) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs), as 

representative of their local member governments, will be pre-certified as meeting the 

FHWA HSIP requirements as part of its safety conscious transportation planning 

process in their transportation planning work programs. Such pre-certified 

organizations will be allocated a certain portion of potential HSIP funds allocated to New 

Mexico as goals for them to submit safety project or program applications with a 

composite cost meeting or exceeding such HSIP funds allocated to them to encourage 

them to submit more worthwhile applications that could be approved by the NMDOT 

and forwarded to FHWA NM Division for consideration. The format of this pre-certified 

procedure will be similar to the Transportation Alternatives Program (TAP) federal funds 

pre-certification process previously established for these RTPOs and MPOs in New 

Mexico. It will also propose a year-round continuous period for all eligible agencies in 

NM to submit HSIP safety project or safety program applications for consideration for 

funding. 

When the NM HSIP staff will have a draft version revised NM HSIP project application 

procedures for review sometime in September 2013, it will coordinate with Jessica 

Griffin of the NMDOT, Planning Division, Government to Government Section to 

schedule a joint MPO/RTPO work session meeting where all MPO/RTPO staff will get to 

review and suggest further revisions to such a draft NM HSIP project application 

procedures document. When this document is successfully revised, it will then be sent 

to FHWA NM Division for their review and either concurrence or rejection.

Once FHWA NM Division has concurred on a new set of application procedures they 

would go into effect immediately.
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

61
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

62

SHSP Emphasis Areas
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

63

For each SHSP emphasis area that relates to the HSIP, present trends in emphasis area performance measures. 

Year - 2012

HSIP-related SHSP 

Emphasis Areas

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

All NM SHSP 

(Comprehensive 

Transportation Safety 

Plan) Emphasis Areas 

Combined

All 371 0 1.46 0 0 0 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

64
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

65
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

66
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

67
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

68

Groups of similar project types
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

69

Present the overall effectiveness of groups of similar types of projects.

Year - 2012

HSIP Sub-program 

Types

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

Fatalities, Serious 

Injuries, Fatality 

Rate and Serious 

injury rate data 

not available 

stratified by 

selected 

subprograms.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

70
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

71
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

72
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

73
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

74

Systemic Treatments
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

75

Present the overall effectiveness of systemic treatments.. 

Year - 2012

Systemic 

improvement

Target 

Crash Type

Number of 

fatalities

Number of 

serious injuries

Fatality rate (per 

HMVMT)

Serious injury rate 

(per HMVMT)

Other1Other2Other3

No data available. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

76
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

77
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

78
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

79
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

80

Describe any other aspects of the overall Highway Safety Improvement Program effectiveness on 

which you would like to elaborate. 

no additional information
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

81

Provide project evaluation data for completed projects (optional). 

Location Functional 

Class

Improvement 

Category

Improvement 

Type

BefFatalBefSerious 

Injury

BefOther 

Injury

BefPDOBefTotalAftFatalAftSerious 

Injury

AftOther 

Injury

AftPDOAftTotalEvaluation 

Results 

(Benefit/ 

Cost Ratio)

No data 

available
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

82

Optional Attachments

Sections Files Attached

Progress in Implementing the Projects: Funds 

Available

HSIP FY2012 Obligation Report 20121203.xlsx

Progress in Implementing the Projects: Funds 

Available

FY13 Safety Funding Obligation030813.pdf

Progress in Implementing the Projects: Funds 

Available

HSIP FY2012 Obligation Report 20130208.xlsx

Progress in Implementing the Projects: Funds 

Available

20130417_safety funding obligation.pdf

Progress in Implementing the Projects: Funds 

Available

safety funding obligation052913.pdf

Progress in Implementing the Projects: General 

Listing of Projects

NM HSIP FY2013 Programmed and or 

Obligated.xlsx

Assessment of the Effectiveness of the 

Improvements: Overview of General Highway 

Safety Trends

NM MAP-21 Performance Measures, Safety, Years 

2006 to 2011 Statewide Network, Year 2030 

Performance Goal, revised.xlsx
2013 New Mexico Highway Safety Improvement Program

83

Glossary

5 year rolling average means the average of five individual, 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 noninfrastructure 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. 

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.