MMUCC 5th Edition Second Online Forum - Home | GHSA · 2 1. NEW: Fatal Crash Section The Panel decided to create a sub section of MMUCC to be completed only when there is a fatal

This document outlines changes proposed by the internal USDOT MMUCC 5th Edition Team.

MMUCC5thEditionSecondOnlineForumTrafficRecordsTeam,NHTSA

1

WelcometotheMMUCCOnlineForumThe Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) is a successful collaboration between the Governors Highway Safety Association (GHSA) and the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA). MMUCC outlines a voluntary, minimum set of standardized data elements for describing motor vehicle crashes that promotes comparability of data within the highway safety community. It can provide a uniform foundation for State crash systems and generate the information necessary to improve highway safety. Since GHSA and NHTSA published the first edition of MMUCC in 1998, regular updates have increased the standardization of crash data across the United States as technology and State capacities have evolved. NHTSA and GHSA are currently working on the next iteration of MMUCC and aim to publish the 5th Edition in 2017. The first of two Expert Panel meetings to update MMUCC was held on July 27–28, 2016. At this meeting, the Expert Panel considered the proposals that were presented in the first MMUCC Online Forum. At the meeting, a number of issues for further consideration were also raised. This is your opportunity to comment on those issues, as well as to comment on proposals received from stakeholders through the first forum. Note that all comments received here will be posted without change at http://www.regulations.gov, including any personal information provided. Comments also may be submitted directly to http://www.regulations.gov in conjunction with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration’s Federal Register notice published in September 2016 and available at [Docket No. NHTSA-2016-0089]. The comment period for the agency’s notice closes on October 7, 2016. For more information on the comment process, including descriptions of the privacy and confidential business information requirements and how they apply, please review the agency’s notice and additional privacy and security information at https://www.regulations.gov/#!privacyNotice. (See also http://docketsinfo.dot.gov.)

RespondentBackgroundPlease provide us some information about your knowledge and experience with Crash Data:

Item # Question Type of Response Are you a current or former law enforcement officer who has

experience completing crash reports? Choose one:

a) Yes b) No

What best describes your most recent use of crash data? Choose one: a) Data collector/ law enforcement b) Data Analyst/researcher c) Database administrator d) Program Manager

Please indicate the number of years you’ve worked with crash data.

Numeric response

Have you provided input to previous editions of MMUCC? Choose one: a) Yes b) No

Are you serving on the expert panel for the MMUCC 5th edition?

Choose one: a) Yes b) No

2

1. NEW:FatalCrashSection The Panel decided to create a sub section of MMUCC to be completed only when there is a fatal crash. The following highlighted text is being proposed to be added to the introduction of the new Fatality section that encourages Sates to collect the information in this section on serious injury crashes.

NewIntroductiontoFatalSectionThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group.

The analysis of fatal crashes is important for identifying safety risks and developing countermeasures. Many State and national safety programs rely on data derived from fatal crash analyses. The Fatality Analysis Reporting system (FARS) is the primary data system and source for motor vehicle crash statistics. FARS relies on crash reports and—at present—much of the information needed for FARS can only be found in the narrative, when it is in the crash report at all. As a result, FARS analysts are frequently challenged to locate and interpret key data from crash reports to complete the coding of a FARS case.

The addition of three FARS data elements (“Attempted Avoidance Maneuver,” “Alcohol Test” and “Drug Test”) for fatal crashes would improve the quality of FARS crash data, which currently attempts to collect this information from the crash narrative. Providing a uniform standard for data collection would lessen reliance on narratives and enhance the FARS process significantly.

Note: In order to meet the requirements outlined in 23 CFR Part 490 which establishes performance measures based on fatal and serious injury crashes for States to carry out their Highway Safety Improvement Program, States are strongly encouraged to collect these elements for Suspected Serious Injury (“P5. Injury Status”) crashes as well.

Item # Question Type of Response 1.1 Do you or agree or disagree with the recommendation to add introductory language

encouraging States to complete the Fatal Section for serious injury crashes? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text

3

2. LargeVehicle/HazardousMaterialSectionThe Panel decided to create a sub section of MMUCC to be completed only when there is a crash involving large vehicles or hazardous materials (LVHM Section). The following highlighted text is being proposed to be added to the previously approved LVHM elements.

IssueLV8:GrossVehicleWeightRating/GrossCombinationWeightRatingThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to provide additional detail for vehicle weight. Note the highlighted changes.

LV8. Gross Vehicle Weight Rating/Gross Combination Weight Rating* Definition The Gross Vehicle Weight Rating (GVWR) is the amount recommended by the manufacturer as the upper limit to

the operational weight for a motor vehicle and any cargo (human or other) to be carried. The Gross Combination Weight Rating (GCWR) is the sum of all GVWRs for each unit in a combination unit motor vehicle. Thus for single-unit trucks there is no difference between the GVWR and the GCWR. For combination trucks (truck tractors pulling a single semi-trailer, truck tractors pulling double or triple trailers, trucks pulling trailers, and trucks pulling other motor vehicles) the GCWR is the total of the GVWRs of all units in the combination.

Attribute Values:

01 02 03 04 05

98

10,000 lbs or less 10,001 – 26,000 lbs 26,001 – 50,000 lbs 50,001 – 80,000 lbs More than 80,000 lbs. Not Applicable

Select 1

Rationale *Required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) CFR 350.201. The FMCSA imposes certain regulations on all single or combination-unit trucks that have a GCWR greater than 10,000 lbs. Additional regulations are imposed on all motor vehicles with GVWRs greater than 26,000 lbs. This data element is collected at the scene because FMCSA requires reporting within 90 days.

Edit Checks: E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02

Edit check one Edit check two

Item # Question Type of Response 2.1 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal for adding additional detail to LV8. Gross

Vehicle Weight Rating/Gross Combination Weight Rating? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


4

IssueLV9:VehicleConfigurationThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group to provide additional details for vehicle configuration. Note the highlighted changes.

LV9. Vehicle Configuration*

Definition Indicates the general configuration of this motor vehicle.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Vehicle Configuration Select 1 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

99

Vehicle 10,000 lbs or less placarded for hazardous materials Bus/Large Van (seats for 9-15 occupants, including driver) Bus (seats more than 15 occupants, including driver) Single-Unit Truck (2-axle and GVWR more than 10,000 lbs) Single-Unit Truck (3 or more axles) Truck Pulling Trailer(s) Truck Tractor (bobtail) Truck Tractor/Semi-Trailer Truck Tractor/Double Truck Tractor/Triple Truck More Than 10,000 lbs., cannot classify Unknown

Subfield 2 Special Sizing Select 1-4 00

01 02 03 04

No Special Sizing Over-height Over-length Over-weight Over-width

Subfield 3 Permitted? Select 1 01 02

Non-permitted Load Permitted Load

Rationale *Required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) CFR 350.201. This data element provides information about the general configuration of the motor vehicle that is important to evaluate the types of motor vehicles that have the most crashes and the effectiveness of various safety countermeasures. This data element is collected at the scene because FMCSA requires reporting within 90 days.



Item # Question Type of Response 2.2 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to add two subfields to vehicle

configuration to capture special sizing and permitted? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


5

IssueLV10:CargoBodyTypeThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to provide the attribute, Motorcoach. Note the highlighted changes.

LV10. Cargo Body Type*

Definition The type of body for buses and trucks more than 10,000 GVWR. Refer to Appendix XYZ for chart displaying types of cargo body types.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Body Type Select 1 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14

97 98 99

No Cargo Body (bobtail, light MV with hazardous materials [HM] placard, etc.) Bus Auto Transporter Cargo Tank Concrete Mixer Dump Flatbed Garbage/Refuse Grain/Chips/Gravel Intermodal Container Chassis Log Motorcoach Pole-Trailer Van/Enclosed Box Vehicle Towing Another Vehicle Not Applicable (MV 10,000 lbs or less, not displaying HM placard) Other Unknown

Rationale *Required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) CFR 350.201. This data element provides additional information about the motor vehicle, including all major cargo body types. The information it provides can be important in helping FMCSA make decisions on regulatory strategies for different types of motor vehicles. This data element is collected at the scene because FMCSA requires reporting within 90 days.



Item # Question Type of Response 2.3 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to add the attribute ‘Motorcoach’ to LV10.

Cargo Body Type? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


6

3. Non-MotoristThe Panel decided to create a sub section of MMUCC to be completed only when there is a crash involving non-motorists (Non-Motorist Section). The following highlighted text is being proposed to be added to the previously approved elements.

ChangeNameandrefinetheattributesforP24andP25,keepingtheoriginallayoutoftheelements.The following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group to provide additional details.

P24. Non-Motorist Contributing Action(s)/Circumstances(s)

Definition The actions/circumstances of the non-motorist that may have contributed to the crash. This data element is based on the judgment of the law enforcement officer investigating the crash.

Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Contributing Action(s)/Circumstances(s) Select 1-2

00

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

98 99

None (No Improper Action) Dart/Dash Disabled Vehicle Related (Working on, Pushing, Leaving/Approaching) Entering/Exiting Parked/Standing Vehicle Failure to Obey Traffic Signs, Signals, or Officer Failure to Yield Right-Of-Way Improper Passing Improper Turn/Merge Inattentive (Talking, Eating, etc.) In Roadway Improperly (Standing, Lying, Working, Playing) Not Visible (Dark Clothing, No Lighting, etc.) Wrong-Way Riding or Walking Other Unknown

Rationale The development of effective roadway design and operation, education, and enforcement measures to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists and prevent crashes with motor vehicles is enhanced by the collection of the actions and circumstances at the time of the crash.



P25. Non-Motorist Location at Time of Crash

Definition The location of the non-motorist with respect to the roadway at the time of crash.

Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Select 1

01 02 03 04 05 06 07

08 09 10

Roadway Facility Intersection – Marked Crosswalk Intersection – Unmarked Crosswalk Intersection – Other Median/Crossing Island Midblock – Marked Crosswalk Shoulder/Roadside Travel Lane – Other Location Bicycle Facility Signed Route (no pavement marking) Shared Roadway (Sharrows/Green Lanes) Bicycle Lane

7

11

12 13 14 15

98 99

Separated Bicycle Lane Other Facility Driveway Access Non-Trafficway Area Shared-Use Path or Trail Sidewalk Other Unknown

Rationale The development of effective roadway design and operation, education, and enforcement measures to accommodate pedestrians and cyclists and prevent crashes with motor vehicles is enhanced by the collection of the location of the non-motorist at the time of crash.



Figure 1: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bikelane_pdg/page01.cfm#chapter1

Item # Question Type of Response

8

3.1 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change P24 Non-Motorist Contributing Action(s)/Circumstances(s) and P25. Non-Motorist Location at Time of Crash?

• Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


9

4. CrashDataElements

IssueC8:ProvideAdditionalDetailtoC8.LocationofFirstHarmfulEventRelativetotheTrafficwayThe following contains suggestions from stakeholders to provide additional attributes and subfields for “C8. Location of First Harmful Event Relative to Trafficway.” Note the highlighted changes. C8. Location of First Harmful Event Relative to Trafficway Definition The location of the first harmful event as it relates to its position within or outside the trafficway. Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Location Select 1

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

99

Gore In parking lane or zone Median Off roadway, location unknown On roadway On Shoulder, Left” On Shoulder, Right” Outside right-of-way (trafficway) Roadside Separator Traffic Island Unknown

Subfield 2 Direction Select 1 01 02 03

99

Forward Backwards Sideways Unknown

Subfield 3 Maneuver Select 1 01 02

99

Straight Turning Unknown

Rationale Proper classification of the use of available occupant restraint systems and helmet use is vital to evaluating the effectiveness of such equipment.



Item # Question Type of Response 4.1 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to provide additional detail to C8.

Location of First Harmful Event Relative to the Trafficway? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


10

IssueC9:ModifydefinitionThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to modify the definition of “C9. Manner of Crash/Collision Impact.” Note the highlighted changes.

The identification of the manner in which two motor vehicles or a motor vehicle and a bicycle/animal-drawn vehicle in transport initially came together without regard to the direction of force. This data element refers only to crashes where the first harmful event involves a collision between two motor vehicles or a motor vehicle and a bicycle/animal-drawn vehicle in transport.

C9. Manner of Crash/Collision Impact Definition The identification of the manner in which two motor vehicles or a motor vehicle and a bicycle/animal-drawn

vehicle in transport initially came together without regard to the direction of force. This data element refers only to crashes where the first harmful event involves a collision between two motor vehicles or a motor vehicle and a bicycle/animal-drawn vehicle in transport.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Select 1 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13

98 99

Angle Backing Fixed Object Front to Front Front to Rear Jacknife Overturn Parking Rear to Rear Rear to Side Sideswipe, Opposite Direction Sideswipe, Same Direction Turning, Opposite Direction Other Unknown

Rationale Edit Checks: E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02


Item # Question Type of Response 4.2 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to modify the definition of “C9.

Manner of Crash/Collision Impact”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text 4.3 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to add attributes to “C9. Manner of

Crash/Collision Impact”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


11

IssueC11&C12:ReorganizeC11WeatherConditionandC12LightConditionThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to reorganize “C11 Weather Condition” and “C12 Light Condition.” Note the highlighted changes.

C11. Weather Conditions Definition The prevailing atmospheric Conditions that existed at the time of the crash Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Precipitation Select 1 01 02 03 04 05 06

99

Clear fog smog smoke freezing rain or freezing drizzle rain sleet or hail snow Unknown

Subfield 2 Wind Select 1 00

01 02 03

99

Little or No Wind Blowing sand, soil, dirt Blowing snow Severe cross winds Unknown



C12. Light Conditions Definition The type/level of light that existed at the time of the crash Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Precipitation Select 1 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08

99

Dark - Lighted Dark - Not Lighted Dark - Unknown Lighted Dawn/Dusk Full Clouds Other Partly Cloudy Sunlight Unknown



Item # Question Type of Response

4.4 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to reorganize “C11. Weather Condition”?

• Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text 4.5 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to add attributes to “C12. Light

Condition”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


12

IssueC15:AddingandDeletingAttributestoC15.ContributingCircumstances–RoadwayEnvironmentThe following proposal is from several public stakeholders to revise the existing attributes of “C15. Contributing Circumstances – Roadway Environment.” Note the highlighted changes.

C15. Contributing Circumstances – Roadway Environment Definition ENTER HERE Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Select 1-4 00

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

98 99

None Absence of sidewalks Animal(s) Backup Due to Prior Crash Backup Due to Prior Non-Recurring Incident Backup Due to Regular Congestion Debris Glare Inaccessible or Obstructed Crosswalks Non-Highway Work Obstruction in Roadway Related to a Bus-Stop Road Surface Condition (rut, holes, bumps) Roadway Width Restricted Shoulders (none, low, soft, high) Toll Booth/Plaza Related Traffic Control Device Traffic Incident Visual Obstruction(s) Weather Conditions Work Zone (construction/maintenance/utility) Worn, Travel-polished Surface Other Unknown



Item # Question Type of Response 4.6 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to C15. Contributing Circumstances –

Roadway Environment? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


13

New(1)CrashDataElement-DigitalPictures A public stakeholder has proposed adding a new data element to include digital photographs of the basic crash scene and vehicle(s) as part of the minimum data to be collected and appended to a crash report.

NEW DATA ELEMENT

Item # Question Type of Response 4.7 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to include digital images of the crash scene and

vehicle(s) as part of MMUCC? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


New(2)CrashDataElement–PublicorPrivatePropertyDamagedA public stakeholder proposed adding a new data element to indicate whether a crash resulted in damage to public or private property. Including this data on a crash report would be helpful for insurance claims and tracking of individuals that need to pay for damage to public property.

NEW DATA ELEMENT

CXX. Public or Private Property Damages Definition ENTER HERE Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Select 1 00

01 02 03

99

No damage Both Private and Public Private Public Unknown



Item # Question Type of Response 4.8 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to add a new data element to indicate if public

or private property was damaged as a result of a crash? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


14

New(3)CrashDataElement:TypeofLawEnforcementAgencyThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to provide additional detail on law enforcement agency types. Note the highlighted changes.

NEW DATA ELEMENT

CXX. Type of Law Enforcement Agency Definition LE Agency to which the on scene reporting officer belongs Attribute Values:

Select 1 01 02 03 04

98 99

State Police County Police Municipal Police Sheriff Department Other Unknown

Rationale Edit

Checks:

E(GT)#.01

E(GT)#.02

Edit check one

Edit check two

Item # Question Type of Response 4.9 Do you agree or disagree with the inclusion of a new data element “Type of Law

Enforcement Agency”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


New:InstructionsforCrashNarrativesandDiagramsA public stakeholder proposed that MMUCC should provide guidance on what makes a good narrative and crash diagram. Both should be included in a minimal crash report.

NEW

Item # Question Type of Response 4.10 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal that MMUCC should provide guidance on

elements of (1) a crash narrative and (2) crash diagram? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


15

5. PersonDataElements

IssueP8:AddingAdaptiveVehicleEquipmenttoP8.RestraintSystems/MotorcycleHelmetUseThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group.

The recommended changes below provide an opportunity to collect valuable information on adaptive vehicle equipment to support a safer environment for those with special needs. Additionally, information collected from the recommended changes could potentially save thousands of lives that are involved in crashes while under the care of the Emergency Medical Services industry. Most of the recommended changes are self-explanatory. The new Subfield 3 “Restraint/Retention System Failure” can simply be determined by noting if the stretcher or wheelchair remains securely fastened to the vehicle after a crash. Please strongly consider these minor changes in order to make a major difference in the safety of medically transported patients and those with special needs.

P8. Restraint Systems / Motorcycle Helmet Use Definition The restraint equipment in use by the occupant, or the helmet use by a motorcyclist, at the time of the crash. Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Select 1

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

12 13 14 15

97 98 99

Restraint Systems Booster Seat Child Restraint System – Forward Facing Child Restraint System – Rear Facing Child Restraint – Type Unknown Lap Belt Only Used None Used – Motor Vehicle Occupant Restraint Used – Type Unknown Shoulder and Lap Belt Used Shoulder Belt Only Used Stretcher Wheelchair Motorcycle Helmet Use DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet Not DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet Unknown If DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet No Helmet Not Applicable Other Unknown

Subfield 2 Any Indication of Improper Use? Select 1-3 01

02 03 04 05 06 07

No Yes – child restraint devices Suspect correct installation of child restraint device Suspect incorrect installation of child restraint device Suspect correct harness/seat belt use with child restraint Suspect incorrect harness/seat belt use with child restraint device Suspect child restraint device installed in correct direction Suspect child restraint device installed in wrong direction

Subfield 3 Any Indication of Restraint/Retention System Failure? Select 1 01 02

No Yes

16

Subfield 4 School Bus Occupant Select 1

01 02

97

Lap belt available and not used Shoulder and Lap Belt available and not used Not Applicable/Not a School Bus Occupant

Rationale Proper classification of the use of available occupant restraint systems and helmet use is vital to evaluating the effectiveness of such equipment.



Item # Question Type of Response 5.1 Do you agree or disagree with adding the attributes, Stretcher and Wheelchair, to Subfield

1, Restraint Systems cluster in “P8. Restraint Systems / Motorcycle Helmet Use”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text 5.2 Do you agree or disagree with adding the child restraint attributes to Subfield 2, Any

Indication of Misuse? in “P8. Restraint Systems / Motorcycle Helmet Use”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text 5.3 Do you agree or disagree with adding a new Subfield 4, School Bus Occupant to “P8.

Restraint Systems / Motorcycle Helmet Use”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


17

IssueP9:AirBagDeployedThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group to allow several combinations of airbags.

P9. Air Bag Deployed

Definition Deployment status of an airbag relative to a position in the vehicle for this occupant.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Select 1-4 00

01 02 03 04

05

97

Not Deployed Deployment Curtain Front Side Other (knee, air belt, etc.) Vehicle not at scene Not Applicable

Rationale Necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of airbags and other occupant protection equipment. Edit Checks: E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02


Item # Question Type of Response 5.4 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to “P.9 Air Bag deployed”? • Agree

• Disagree • No Opinion


18

IssueP16:AddAlcoholInterlockDevicedatatoexistingelement,PL1This proposal would collect information about alcohol interlock devices. Two options are presented the first would add Alcohol Interlock as an attribute under driver license restriction. The second option would be to create a new data element, which would also collect information about whether the interlock use contributed to the crash.

Option 1: Add Alcohol Interlock Device Attributes and subfield to PL1 Driver License Restrictions (Highlighted Text)

PL1. Driver License Restrictions Definition Restrictions assigned to an individual’s driver license by the license examiner

Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Driver Restrictions Select 1-3

00

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19

None Alcohol Interlock Device Automatic Transmission CDL Intrastate Only Corrective Lenses Except Class A and Class B Bus Except Class A Bus Except Tractor-Trailer Farm Waiver Intermediate License Restrictions Learner’s Permit Restrictions Limited to Daylight Only Limited to Employment Limited-Other Mechanical Devices (special brakes, hand controls, or other adaptive devices) Military Vehicles Only Motor Vehicles Without Air Brakes Other Outside Mirror Prosthetic Aid

Subfield 2 Alcohol Interlock Present? Select 1 01 02

99

No Yes Unknown

Rationale Used to identify if a driver involved in crash has limitations on their driver license. Edit Checks:

E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02


19

Option Two: Add a new data element for Alcohol Interlock Device for all Drivers (level three)

PX. Alcohol Interlock Device

Definition Insert here.

Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Alcohol Interlock Present? Select 1

01 02

99

No Yes Unknown

Subfield 2 Driver License Restriction? Select 1 01 02

99

No Yes Unknown

Subfield 3 Law Enforcement Suspects Contributing Factor to Crash? Select 1 01 02

99

No Yes Unknown

Rationale INSERT HERE



Item # Type of Response 5.5 Which method for collecting information on alcohol interlock

devices do you prefer, looking at the ease of use by law enforcement, feasibility, and usefulness?

• Strongly prefer amending PL1 version • Somewhat prefer amending PL1 version • No Opinion • Somewhat prefer new element version • Strongly prefer new element version


20

IssueP17:AddadditionalinformationonDrowsyandPhysicallyImpairedDrivingThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.

The new definition of asleep or fatigued would match the FARS definition. The change is highlighted below: “Driver experienced a temporary loss of consciousness, was drowsy or sleepy, or was operating in a reduced physical or mental capacity due to weariness, medication, or other drugs”.

P17. Condition at Time of the Crash Definition Any relevant condition of the individual (motorist or non-motorist) that is directly related to the crash Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 00

01 02 03 04 05 06

97 98 99

Apparently Normal Asleep or Fatigued Drowsy Emotional (depressed, angry, disturbed, etc) Ill (sick), Fainted Physically Impaired Under the influence of Medications/ Drugs/ Alcohol Not applicable Other Unknown

Select up to 2

Subfield 2 List Type of Physical Impairment when “Physically Impaired” Select 1 List type

Subfield 3 Last Sleeping Time” when “Asleep or Fatigued Select 1 01 02

When Last Slept For how long Last Slept.

Rationale

Important for evaluating the effect that fatigue, medication/alcohol/drugs, or other conditions have on crash.


If Subfield 1 = 02 Then Subfield 2 must be completed If Subfield 1 = 05 then Subfield 3 must be completed Edit check two

Item # Question Type of Response 5.6 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to the definition of “Asleep or

Fatigued”? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion

Please provide a comment to explain your response • Open Text 5.7 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to P17. Condition at Time of the

Crash? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


21

IssueP20:LawEnforcementSuspectsDrugUseThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.

Due to the legalization of recreational marijuana in an increasing number of States, this additional subfield and attributes have been proposed to measure impact of marijuana legalization on traffic safety.

P20. Law Enforcement Suspects Drug Use Definition Driver or non-motorist involved in the crash suspected by law enforcement to have used drugs Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 01 02

99

No Yes Unknown

Select 1

Subfield 2 Type Select 1 00

01 02 03

None – no drug use suspected Marijuana Prescription Drugs Other Illicit Drugs

Rationale

Drug-related crashes remain a serious traffic safety problem. Identifying crashes in which drugs may have been involved will help evaluate the effectiveness of programs to decrease the incidence of driving while under the influence of drugs. As more States legalize recreational marijuana, data is needed to determine the impact on traffic safety

. Edit Checks: E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02

If Subfield 1 = 02 Then Subfield 2 must be completed

Item # Question Type of Response 5.8 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed additional subfield and attributes for P20. Law

Enforcement Suspects Drug Use? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


22

IssueP21:DrugTestThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.

P21. Drug TestDefinition Indication of the presence of drug test, type, and result. Excludes drugs administered post-crash. See Drug Test

Results P18Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Test Status Enter 2 Values0102 03

99

Test GivenTest Not Given Test Refused Unknown if Tested

Subfield 2 Type of Test Enter 1 Values0102 03

97

Blood Urine Saliva Other

Subfield 3 Drug Screening Level Enter ValueEnter value

97 99

Drug Screening Level (ng/mL) Not Applicable Unknown

Subfield 4 Drug Cut-Off Level for Positive/Negative Determination Enter ValueEnter value

97 99

Drug Cut-Off Level (ng/mL) Not Applicable Unknown

Rationale Identifying drug-related crashes help develop and evaluate programs directed at reducing their involvement . Whenever evidence of other drug use is available.

Edit Checks:E(GT)#.01E(GT)#.02

Edit check oneEdit check two

Item # Question Type of Response 5.9 Do you agree or disagree with the addition of the Subfield 3 Drug Screening Level and

Subfield 4 Drug Cut-Off Level for Positive/Negative Determination? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


23

6. VehicleDataElements

Issue:V1.MotorVehicleIdentificationNumberThe following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.

Change “V1. Motor Vehicle Identification Number ” to: “V1. Vehicle Identification Number”

Item # Question Type of Response 6.1 Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to change “V1. Motor Vehicle Identification

Number” to “V1 Vehicle Identification Number“? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


IssueV8:AccommodatingtheLargeVehicle/HazardousMaterials(LVHM)CrashSectionforAnyVehicleCarryingHazardousMaterialThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group. The new Large Vehicle/Hazardous Materials (LVHM) Crash Section should be completed for any vehicle carrying hazardous materials. The following proposal separates out into 2 elements or subfields in V8 -- Light/Medium/Heavy Vehicle and then Body Style (Type) within – and to revisit the issues about element V10. Add the highlighted subfields to MMUCC Data Element V8. Note highlighted changes.

V8. Motor Vehicle Body Type Category and HM Display

Definition The category indicating the general configuration or shape of a motor vehicle distinguished by characteristics such as number of doors, rows of seats, windows, or roof line. Personal conveyances – such as skateboards, motorized toy cars, and wheelchairs are not considered motor vehicles.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Body Type Select 1 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09

10 11 12 13 14 15 16

17 18

19 20

All-Terrain Vehicle/All-Terrain Cycle (ATV/ATC) Golf Cart Snowmobile Low Speed Vehicle Moped or motorized bicycle Recreational Off-Highway Vehicles (ROV) 2-Wheeled Motorcycle 3-Wheeled Motorcycle Auto Cycle Passenger Car Passenger Van (Sport) Utility Vehicle Pickup Cargo Van** Construction Equipment (backhoe, bulldozer, etc.) Farm Equipment (tractor, combine harvester, etc.) Single-Unit Truck** Truck Tractor** Motor Home 12- or 15-Passenger Van**

24

21 22 23 24 25

26 27

98

Large Limo** Mini-bus** School Bus** Transit Bus** Motorcoach** Other Bus Type** Other Trucks Other

Subfield 2 Number of Trailing Units (for Large Trucks only) Select 1 01-03

97

Number of trailers behind tractor Not Applicable (vehicle with no trailing units)

Subfield 3 Vehicle Size NOTE: GVWR is used for single-unit trucks and other body types. GCWR is used for combination trucks or any vehicle with a trailing unit. Select 1

01 02 03

Light (Less than 10,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR) Medium (10,001 – 26,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR)** Heavy (Greater than 26,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR)**

Subfield 4 Did this motor vehicle display a hazardous materials (HM) placard? Select 1 01 02

No Yes**

Rationale Important to identify the specific type of motor vehicle involved in the crash for evaluation and comparison purposes.

**If attribute is selected from Subfield 1, 3 or 4, the Large Vehicle/Hazardous Materials Section must be completed.**



Item # Question Type of Response 6.2 Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change V8. Motor Vehicle Body Type

Category and HM Display? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


25

IssueV10:SpecialFunctionofMotorVehicleinTransportThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group.

The proposed changes to V10. Special Function of Motor Vehicle in Transport, attempts to resolve the current confound of function and body type. Also this change clarifies the attribute “Non-Transport Emergency Services Vehicle” and defines the new attribute “Safety Services Patrol.” Note highlighted changes.

V10. Special Function of Motor Vehicle in Transport

Definition

The type of special function being served by this vehicle regardless of whether the function is marked on the vehicle, at the time of the crash. Buses are any motor vehicle with seats to transport nine (9) or more people, including the driver seat, but not including vans owned and operated for personal use.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Special Function Select 1 00

01 02 03 04 05 06 07

08 09 10 11 12

13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21

22 23

98 99

No Special Function Bus – School (Public or Private) Bus – Childcare/Daycare Bus – Transit Bus – Charter Bus – Intercity Bus – Shuttle Bus – Other Farm Vehicle Fire Truck Highway/Maintenance Mail Carrier Military Ambulance Police Public Utility Non-Transport Emergency Services Vehicle Safety Service Patrols – Incident Response Other Incident Response Rental Truck (Over 10,000 lbs) Towing – Incident Response Truck Acting as Crash Attenuator Taxi Vehicle Used for Electronic Ride-hailing (transportation network company) Other Unknown

Rationale Important to evaluate the outcome of vehicles used for special uses that are involved in crashes. Edit Checks: E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02


Item # Question Type of Response 6.3 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V10. Special Function of Motor

Vehicle in Transport? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


26

IssueV14:DifficultyIdentifyingTrafficwaysInvolvingHOVorHOTLanesThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group. The MMUCC 4th Edition could not identify complex trafficways such as HOV or HOT lanes. Given the increased use of HOV and HOT lanes, it is important to capture information on them to understand their relative safety. The following highlighted text is proposed to address this issue: V14. Trafficway Description Definitions Indication of whether or not the trafficway for this vehicle is divided and whether it serves one-way or two-way

traffic and the type of lane this vehicle was using. Subfield one identifies whether the trafficway associated with this vehicle serves one-way or two-way traffic. Subfield two identifies whether or not the trafficway for this vehicle is divided. Subfield 3 identifies the configuration of the HOV/HOT lane if this vehicle’s involvement in the crash was related to its entry, use of, or exit from an HOV/HOT lane. Subfield 4 identifies the type of lane this vehicle was using when involved in the crash.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Travel Directions Select 1 01 02

One-Way Two-Way

Subfield 2 Divided? Select 1 01

02 03 04 05 06

99

One-Way Trafficway Two-Way Trafficways Not Divided Not Divided, With a Continuous Left Turn Lane Divided, Unprotected Flush Median Divided, Raised Median Barrier Divided, Depressed Median Unknown

Subfield 3 HOV/HOT Lanes Related? Select 1 00

01 02 03

None present HOV/HOT Lanes Separated, Flush, Raised or Depressed Median Not Separated, Painted Pavement Markings, Post-Mounted Delineators Other

Subfield 4 Crash Related Lane Type Select 1 01 02

97

General Purpose Lane HOV/HOT Lane Not applicable

Rationale Used in classifying crashes as well as identifying the environment of a particular crash. Note that the data must be in a road inventory file or collected by the reporting officer at the scene. It is not readily derived from other road data such as classification or route. Important to guide future trafficway design and traffic control.



Item # Question Type of Response 6.4 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V14. Trafficway Description? • Agree


27


IssueV15:InconsistentDefinitionfor“V15.TotalLanesinRoadway”The following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group. The definition of the MMUCC data element “V15. Total Lanes in Roadway” is inconsistent with the FARS definition. The MMUCC 4th edition did not include turning lanes in the definition of the total number of lanes in the roadway, while FARS does. This difference negatively impacts data quality.

• Update the MMUCC definition of total lanes in roadway to match FARS shown in element “V15. Total Lanes in Roadway.” The highlighted text below indicates the change.

V15. Total Lanes in Roadway Definition Total number of lanes in the roadway on which this MV was traveling. Through lanes also includes shared

through/turn lanes but excludes, turn only lanes’ auxiliary lanes, such as collector-distributor lanes, weaving lanes, frontage road lanes, parking lanes, acceleration/deceleration lanes, toll collection lanes and truck climbing lanes. Total lanes are collected in two parts as total through lanes and total auxiliary lanes.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Undivided Trafficways Enter 2 Values xx yy

97

Enter the total through lanes in both directions, excluding auxiliary lanes. Enter the total auxiliary lanes in both directions Not Applicable

Subfield 2 Divided Trafficways Enter 2 Values xx yy

97

Enter the total through lanes in the vehicle’s direction, excluding auxiliary lanes. Enter the total auxiliary lanes in the vehicle’s direction Not Applicable

Rationale Used in classifying crashes as well as identifying the environment of a particular crash. Note that the data must be in a road inventory file or collected by the reporting officer at the scene. It is not readily derived from other road data such as classification or route. Important to guide future trafficway design and traffic control.



Item # Question Type of Response 6.5 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V15. Total Lanes in Roadway? • Agree



28

IssueV17:TrafficControlDeviceTypeThe following changes were submitted by an expert panel small group to organize and enhance the list of attributes available to describe the traffic control device. Please note the highlighted changes. V17. Traffic Control Device Type Definition The type of traffic control device (TCD) applicable to this motor vehicle at the crash location. Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 TCD Type Select 1-4 00 01

02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11

12 13 14 15 16 17 18

19 20 21 22 23

98 99

No Controls Person (including flagger, law enforcement, crossing guard, etc.) Signs Railroad Crossing Sign School Zone Sign Stop Sign Yield Sign “Curve Ahead” Warning Sign Pedestrian Cross Sign “Intersection Ahead” Warning Sign “Reduce Speed Ahead” Warning Sign Bicycle Crossing Sign Other Warning Sign Signals Flashing Traffic Control Signal Ramp Meter Signal Lane Use Control Signal Traffic Control Signal Flashing Railroad Crossing Signal (may include gates) Flashing School Zone Signal Other Signal Pavement Markings School Zone Railroad Crossing Pedestrian Crossing Bicycle Crossing Other Pavement Marking Other Unknown

Subfield 2 Inoperative/Missing? Select 1 01 02

No Yes

Rationale

This element needs to be collected at the scene because the presence of specific devices is better verified at the time of the crash. It is also important for ascertaining the relationship between the use of various traffic control devices (TCD) and crashes and identifying the need for upgraded TCDs at specific crash locations.



Item # Question Type of Response 6.6 Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V17. Traffic Control Device Type? • Agree



29

IssueV20:SequenceofEvents The following attribute was submitted by a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted change.

V20. Sequence of Events Definition The sequence of events are events in sequence related to this motor vehicle, including both non-collision and

collision events. For examples, refer to Appendix XYZ. Attribute Values:

Subfield 1 Select 1-4

01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17

18 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29

30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48

Non-Collision Cargo/Equipment Loss or Shift Cross Centerline Cross Median End Departure Downhill Runaway Equipment Failure (blown tire, brake failure, etc.) Fell/Jumped From Motor Vehicle Fire/Explosion Immersion, Full or Partial Jackknife Other Non-Collision Overturn/Rollover Thrown or Falling Object Ran Off Roadway Left Ran Off Roadway Right Reentering Roadway Separation of Units Collision With Person, Motor Vehicle, or Non-Fixed Object Animal (live) Motor Vehicle in Transport Strikes Object at Rest from MV in Transport Other Non-Fixed Object Other Non-motorist Parked Motor Vehicle Pedalcycle Pedestrian Railway Vehicle (train, engine) Struck by Falling, Shifting Cargo or Anything Set in Motion by Motor Vehicle Work Zone/Maintenance Equipment Collision With Fixed Object Bridge Overhead Structure Bridge Pier or Support Bridge Rail Cable Barrier Concrete Traffic Barrier Culvert Curb Ditch Embankment Fence Guardrail End Terminal Guardrail Face Impact Attenuator/Crash Cushion Mailbox Other Fixed Object (wall, building, tunnel, etc.) Other Post, Pole or Support Other Traffic Barrier Traffic Sign Support Traffic Signal Support Tree (standing)

30

49 50

Utility Pole/Light Support Unknown Collision With Fixed Object

Rationale Important for use in conjunction with V21. Most Harmful Event for this MV and V18. Motor Vehicle Maneuver/Action to generate complete information about the crash.



Item # Question Type of Response 6.7 Do you agree or disagree with the addition of the attribute End Departure for V20.

Sequence of Events? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


31

7. NewDataElementforAutomatedVehicles

Issue:AddressingEmergingAutonomousVehicleTechnologyAutomated vehicle technology is rapidly evolving, with many vehicles already on our roads with some level of automation capability. To ensure good data will be available in 5-10 years when this technology becomes more mainstream, we will add this element now, in recognition that it takes an average of ten or more years for States to adopt changes. Two versions of this element have been provided with some strengths and weaknesses of each. Please review both versions to provide your preference. (Original Version) New Data Element: Motor Vehicle Automation Capability V#. MV Automation Capability Definition No-Automation: The driver is in complete and sole control of the primary vehicle controls – brake,

steering, throttle, and motive power – at all times. Partial Automation:

• Automation at this level involves one or more specific control functions. Examples include electronic stability control or pre-charged brakes, where the vehicle automatically assists with braking to enable the driver to regain control of the vehicle or stop faster than possible by acting alone.

• This level involves automation of at least two primary control functions designed to work in

unison to relieve the driver of control of those functions. An example of combined functions enabling a Level 2 system is adaptive cruise control in combination with lane centering.

• Vehicles at this level of automation enable the driver to cede full control of all safety-critical

functions under certain traffic or environmental conditions and in those conditions to rely heavily on the vehicle to monitor for changes in those conditions requiring transition back to driver control. The driver is expected to be available for occasional control, but with sufficiently comfortable transition time. The Google car is an example of limited self-driving automation.

Full Automation: The vehicle is designed to perform all safety-critical driving functions and monitor roadway conditions for an entire trip. Such a design anticipates that the driver will provide destination or navigation input, but is not expected to be available for control at any time during the trip. This includes both occupied and unoccupied vehicles.

Attribute Values:

Subfield 2 Vehicle Automation Level Select 1 00 01 02

97

No Automation Partial Automation Full Automation Not Applicable/Not a MV

Rationale INSERT HERE. Edit Checks:

E(GT)#.01 E(GT)#.02


32

(Updated Version) New Data Element: Motor Vehicle Automation Equipped and Use

V#. Motor Vehicle Automation Equipped and Use Definition(s) No Automation:* The full-time performance by the human driver of all aspects of the dynamic driving

task, even when enhanced by warning or intervention systems. Driver Assistance:* Driver assistance system of either steering or acceleration/deceleration using information about the driving environment and with the expectation that the human driver perform all remaining aspects of the dynamic driving task. Partial Automation:* The driving mode-specific execution by one or more driver assistance systems of both steering and acceleration/deceleration using information about the driving environment and with the expectation that the human driver perform all remaining aspects of the dynamic driving task. Conditional Automation:* The driving mode-specific performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task with the expectation that the human driver will respond appropriately to a request to intervene. High Automation:* The driving mode-specific performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task, even if a human driver does not respond appropriately to a request to intervene. Full Automation:* The full-time performance by an automated driving system of all aspects of the dynamic driving task under all roadway and environmental conditions that can be managed by a human driver. *Refer to Figure 1 for automation level determination. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dynamic driving task includes the operational (steering, braking, accelerating, monitoring the vehicle and roadway) and tactical (responding to events, determining when to change lanes, turn, use signals, etc.) aspects of the driving task, but not the strategic (determining destinations and waypoints) aspect of the driving task. Driving mode is a type of driving scenario with characteristic dynamic driving task requirements (e.g., expressway merging, high speed cruising, low speed traffic jam, closed-campus operations, etc.). Request to intervene is notification by the automated driving system to a human driver that s/he should promptly begin or resume performance of the dynamic driving task.

Attribute Values: Subfield 1 Vehicle Automation Level Select 1 00 01 02 03 04 05 99

No Automation Driver Assistance Partial Automation Conditional Automation High Automation Full Automation Unknown

Subfield 2 Vehicle Automation Use Select 1 01 02 99

Yes No Unknown

Rationale As motor vehicles become increasingly automated, States will have the ability to measure how the different levels of vehicle automation affects traffic safety.



33

Item # Question Type of Response 7.1 Which version of “Motor Vehicle Automation…” do you prefer, looking at the

ease of use by law enforcement, feasibility, and usefulness? • Strongly prefer original

version • Somewhat prefer original

version • No Opinion • Somewhat prefer updated

version • Strongly prefer updated

version Please provide a comment to explain your response Open Text

7.2 How should the data on either Motor vehicle Automation Capability (original version)/ Vehicle Automation Level (Subfield 1, updated version) be collected?

• Collected at scene • Linked


7.3 How should the data on Vehicle Automation Use be collected? • Collected at scene • Linked


34

8. NewDataAttributeValue:VehicleNotatScene The proposed attribute value, vehicle not at scene, is for circumstances when an officer cannot determine the appropriate attribute because the vehicle is unavailable (e.g, towed/bottom of a lake). In such cases unknown is inappropriate.

Item # Question Type of Response 8.1 Do you agree or disagree with adding the new attribute value Vehicle Not at

Scene, where appropriate? • Agree • Disagree • No Opinion


9. SuggestChangestotheModelMinimumUniformCrashCriteria

Item # Question Type of Response Do you have any suggestion(s) for improving an existing MMUCC data

element or attribute? Open Text

Do you have any suggestion(s) for (a) new attribute(s)? Open Text General Comment on MMUUCC Open Text

Documents

MMUCC 5th Edition Second Online Forum - Home | GHSA · 2 1. NEW: Fatal Crash Section The Panel decided to create a sub section of MMUCC to be completed only when there is a fatal