This document outlines changes proposed
by the internal USDOT MMUCC 5th
Edition Team.
MMUCC5th
Edition
Second
Online
Forum
TrafficRecordsTeam,NHTSA
WelcometotheMMUCCOnlineForum
The 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.)
RespondentBackground
Please provide us some information about your knowledge and experience with Crash Data:
Item #
Question
Are you a current or former law enforcement officer who has
experience completing crash reports?
What best describes your most recent use of crash data?
Please indicate the number of years you’ve worked with crash
data.
Have you provided input to previous editions of MMUCC?
Are you serving on the expert panel for the MMUCC 5th
edition?
1
Type of Response
Choose one:
a) Yes
b) No
Choose one:
a) Data collector/ law enforcement
b) Data Analyst/researcher
c) Database administrator
d) Program Manager
Numeric response
Choose one:
a) Yes
b) No
Choose one:
a) Yes
b) No
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.
NewIntroductiontoFatalSection
The 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 #
1.1
Question
Do you or agree or disagree with the recommendation to add introductory language
encouraging States to complete the Fatal Section for serious injury crashes?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
2
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
2. LargeVehicle/HazardousMaterialSection
The 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/GrossCombinationWeightRating
The 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
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.
98
Not Applicable
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
Item #
2.1
Select 1
Edit check one
Edit check two
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal for adding additional detail to LV8. Gross
Vehicle Weight Rating/Gross Combination Weight Rating?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
3
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueLV9:VehicleConfiguration
The 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
01 Vehicle 10,000 lbs or less placarded for hazardous materials
02 Bus/Large Van (seats for 9-15 occupants, including driver)
03 Bus (seats more than 15 occupants, including driver)
04 Single-Unit Truck (2-axle and GVWR more than 10,000 lbs)
05 Single-Unit Truck (3 or more axles)
06 Truck Pulling Trailer(s)
07 Truck Tractor (bobtail)
08 Truck Tractor/Semi-Trailer
09 Truck Tractor/Double
10 Truck Tractor/Triple
11 Truck More Than 10,000 lbs., cannot classify
99
Subfield 2
00
01
02
03
04
Subfield 3
01
02
Rationale
Select 1
Unknown
Special Sizing
No Special Sizing
Select 1-4
Over-height
Over-length
Over-weight
Over-width
Permitted?
Non-permitted Load
Permitted Load
Select 1
*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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
2.2
Question
Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to add two subfields to vehicle
configuration to capture special sizing and permitted?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
4
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueLV10:CargoBodyType
The following is a proposal from a public stakeholder to provide the attribute, Motorcoach. Note the
highlighted changes.
LV10. Cargo Body Type*
The type of body for buses and trucks more than 10,000 GVWR. Refer to Appendix XYZ for chart displaying types
Definition
of cargo body types.
Attribute Values:
Subfield 1
00
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
97
98
99
Rationale
Body Type
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
Select 1
Not Applicable (MV 10,000 lbs or less, not displaying HM placard)
Other
Unknown
*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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
2.3
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to add the attribute ‘Motorcoach’ to LV10.
Cargo Body Type?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
5
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
3. Non-Motorist
The 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,keepingtheoriginal
layoutoftheelements.
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)
00 None (No Improper Action)
Select 1-2
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
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
98
99
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
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
Roadway Facility
01 Intersection – Marked Crosswalk
02 Intersection – Unmarked Crosswalk
03 Intersection – Other
04 Median/Crossing Island
05 Midblock – Marked Crosswalk
06 Shoulder/Roadside
07 Travel Lane – Other Location
08
09
10
Select 1
Bicycle Facility
Signed Route (no pavement marking)
Shared Roadway (Sharrows/Green Lanes)
Bicycle Lane
6
11
Separated Bicycle Lane
12
13
14
15
Other Facility
Driveway Access
Non-Trafficway Area
Shared-Use Path or Trail
Sidewalk
98
99
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Figure 1: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/environment/bicycle_pedestrian/publications/separated_bikelane_pdg/page01.cfm#chapter1
Item #
Question
Type of Response
7
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?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
8
•
•
•
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
4. CrashDataElements
IssueC8:ProvideAdditionalDetailtoC8.LocationofFirstHarmfulEvent
RelativetotheTrafficway
The 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
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
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
99
Unknown
Subfield 2
01
02
03
99
Subfield 3
01
02
99
Rationale
Direction
Forward
Backwards
Sideways
Select 1
Select 1
Unknown
Maneuver
Straight
Turning
Select 1
Unknown
Proper classification of the use of available occupant restraint systems and helmet use is vital to evaluating the
effectiveness of such equipment.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
4.1
Question
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?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
9
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueC9:Modifydefinition
The 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/animaldrawn 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
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
98
99
Select 1
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 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
4.2
4.3
Question
Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to modify the definition of “C9.
Manner of Crash/Collision Impact”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change to add attributes to “C9. Manner of
Crash/Collision Impact”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
10
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
•
Agree
•
Disagree
•
No Opinion
Open Text
•
•
•
IssueC11&C12:ReorganizeC11WeatherConditionandC12LightCondition
The 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
01
02
03
04
05
06
99
Subfield 2
00
Precipitation
Clear
fog smog smoke
freezing rain or freezing drizzle
rain
sleet or hail
snow
Select 1
Unknown
Wind
Little or No Wind
01
02
03
Blowing sand, soil, dirt
Blowing snow
Severe cross winds
99
Unknown
Select 1
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
C12. Light Conditions
Definition
The type/level of light that existed at the time of the crash
Attribute Values:
Subfield 1
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
99
Precipitation
Dark - Lighted
Dark - Not Lighted
Dark - Unknown Lighted
Dawn/Dusk
Full Clouds
Other
Partly Cloudy
Sunlight
Select 1
Unknown
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
4.4
4.5
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to reorganize “C11. Weather
Condition”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to add attributes to “C12. Light
Condition”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
11
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
•
Agree
•
Disagree
•
No Opinion
Open Text
•
•
•
IssueC15:AddingandDeletingAttributestoC15.ContributingCircumstances
–RoadwayEnvironment
The 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
00 None
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
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
98
99
Other
Unknown
Select 1-4
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
4.6
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to C15. Contributing Circumstances –
Roadway Environment?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
12
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
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 #
4.7
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to include digital images of the crash scene and
vehicle(s) as part of MMUCC?
•
•
•
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
New(2)CrashDataElement–PublicorPrivatePropertyDamaged
A 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
00 No damage
01
02
03
Both Private and Public
Private
Public
99
Unknown
Select 1
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
4.8
Question
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?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
13
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
New(3)CrashDataElement:TypeofLawEnforcementAgency
The 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
Attribute Values:
Agency to which the on scene reporting officer belongs
Select 1
01
02
03
04
State Police
County Police
Municipal Police
Sheriff Department
98
99
Other
Unknown
Rationale
Edit
Checks:
E(GT)#.01
Edit check one
E(GT)#.02
Edit check two
Item #
4.9
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the inclusion of a new data element “Type of Law
Enforcement Agency”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
New:InstructionsforCrashNarrativesandDiagrams
A 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 #
4.10
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal that MMUCC should provide guidance on
elements of (1) a crash narrative and (2) crash diagram?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
14
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
5. PersonDataElements
IssueP8:AddingAdaptiveVehicleEquipmenttoP8.RestraintSystems/
MotorcycleHelmetUse
The 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
Restraint Systems
01 Booster Seat
02 Child Restraint System – Forward Facing
03 Child Restraint System – Rear Facing
04 Child Restraint – Type Unknown
05 Lap Belt Only Used
06 None Used – Motor Vehicle Occupant
07 Restraint Used – Type Unknown
08 Shoulder and Lap Belt Used
09 Shoulder Belt Only Used
10 Stretcher
11 Wheelchair
12
13
14
15
Motorcycle Helmet Use
DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet
Not DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet
Unknown If DOT-Compliant Motorcycle Helmet
No Helmet
97
98
99
Not Applicable
Other
Unknown
Subfield 2
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
Subfield 3
01
02
Any Indication of Improper Use?
No
Select 1-3
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
Any Indication of Restraint/Retention System Failure?
No
Yes
15
Select 1
Subfield 4
School Bus Occupant
01
02
Lap belt available and not used
Shoulder and Lap Belt available and not used
97
Not Applicable/Not a School Bus Occupant
Rationale
Select 1
Proper classification of the use of available occupant restraint systems and helmet use is vital to evaluating the
effectiveness of such equipment.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
5.1
Question
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”?
5.2
Please provide a comment to explain your response
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”?
5.3
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Do you agree or disagree with adding a new Subfield 4, School Bus Occupant to “P8.
Restraint Systems / Motorcycle Helmet Use”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
16
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueP9:AirBagDeployed
The 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
00 Not Deployed
01
02
03
04
Deployment
Curtain
Front
Side
Other (knee, air belt, etc.)
05
Vehicle not at scene
97
Not Applicable
Select 1-4
Rationale Necessary to evaluate the effectiveness of airbags and other occupant protection equipment.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
5.4
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to “P.9 Air Bag deployed”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
17
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueP16:AddAlcoholInterlockDevicedatatoexistingelement,PL1
This 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
00 None
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
Subfield 2
01
02
99
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01
E(GT)#.02
Select 1-3
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
Alcohol Interlock Present?
No
Yes
Select 1
Unknown
Used to identify if a driver involved in crash has limitations on their driver license.
Edit check one
Edit check two
18
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?
01 No
02 Yes
99
Subfield 2
01
02
99
Subfield 3
01
02
99
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01
E(GT)#.02
Item #
5.5
Select 1
Unknown
Driver License Restriction?
No
Yes
Select 1
Unknown
Law Enforcement Suspects Contributing Factor to Crash?
No
Yes
Select 1
Unknown
INSERT HERE
Edit check one
Edit check two
Which method for collecting information on alcohol interlock
devices do you prefer, looking at the ease of use by law
enforcement, feasibility, and usefulness?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
19
•
•
•
•
•
Type of Response
Strongly prefer amending PL1 version
Somewhat prefer amending PL1 version
No Opinion
Somewhat prefer new element version
Strongly prefer new element version
Open Text
IssueP17:AddadditionalinformationonDrowsyandPhysicallyImpaired
Driving
The 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
Apparently Normal
Select up to 2
01
02
03
04
05
06
Asleep or Fatigued
Drowsy
Emotional (depressed, angry, disturbed, etc)
Ill (sick), Fainted
Physically Impaired
Under the influence of Medications/ Drugs/ Alcohol
97
98
99
Not applicable
Other
Unknown
Subfield 2
List Type of Physical Impairment when “Physically Impaired”
List type
Select 1
Subfield 3
01
02
Last Sleeping Time” when “Asleep or Fatigued
When Last Slept
For how long Last Slept.
Select 1
Rationale Important for evaluating the effect that fatigue, medication/alcohol/drugs, or other conditions have on crash.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 If Subfield 1 = 02 Then Subfield 2 must be completed
E(GT)#.02 If Subfield 1 = 05 then Subfield 3 must be completed Edit check two
Item #
5.6
5.7
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed change to the definition of “Asleep or
Fatigued”?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to P17. Condition at Time of the
Crash?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
20
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueP20:LawEnforcementSuspectsDrugUse
The 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
Subfield 2
00
01
02
03
Rationale
No
Yes
Select 1
Unknown
Type
None – no drug use suspected
Select 1
Marijuana
Prescription Drugs
Other Illicit Drugs
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 If Subfield 1 = 02 Then Subfield 2 must be completed
E(GT)#.02
Item #
5.8
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed additional subfield and attributes for P20. Law
Enforcement Suspects Drug Use?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
21
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueP21:DrugTest
The following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.
P21. Drug Test
Definition
Indication of the presence of drug test, type, and result. Excludes drugs administered post-crash. See Drug Test
Results P18
Attribute Values:
Subfield 1 Test Status
Enter 2 Values
01 Test Given
02 Test Not Given
03 Test Refused
99 Unknown if Tested
Subfield 2
01
02
03
Enter 1 Values
Type of Test
Blood Urine
Saliva
97 Other
Enter Value
Subfield 3 Drug Screening Level
Enter value Drug Screening Level (ng/mL)
97 Not Applicable
99 Unknown
Subfield 4 Drug Cut-Off Level for Positive/Negative Determination
Enter value Drug Cut-Off Level (ng/mL)
Enter Value
97 Not Applicable
99 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)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
5.9
Question
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?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
22
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
6. VehicleDataElements
Issue:V1.MotorVehicleIdentificationNumber
The following is a proposal from a public stakeholder. Note the highlighted changes.
Change “V1. Motor Vehicle Identification Number ” to: “V1. Vehicle Identification Number”
Item #
6.1
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposal to change “V1. Motor Vehicle Identification
Number” to “V1 Vehicle Identification Number“?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueV8:AccommodatingtheLargeVehicle/HazardousMaterials(LVHM)
CrashSectionforAnyVehicleCarryingHazardousMaterial
The 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
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
Body Type
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
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
Passenger Car
Passenger Van
(Sport) Utility Vehicle
Pickup
Cargo Van**
Construction Equipment (backhoe, bulldozer, etc.)
Farm Equipment (tractor, combine harvester, etc.)
17
18
Single-Unit Truck**
Truck Tractor**
19
20
Motor Home
12- or 15-Passenger Van**
23
Select 1
21
22
23
24
25
Large Limo**
Mini-bus**
School Bus**
Transit Bus**
Motorcoach**
26
27
Other Bus Type**
Other Trucks
98
Other
Subfield 2
01-03
97
Subfield 3
Number of Trailing Units (for Large Trucks only)
Number of trailers behind tractor
Select 1
Not Applicable (vehicle with no trailing units)
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.
01
02
03
Subfield 4
01
02
Rationale
Select 1
Light (Less than 10,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR)
Medium (10,001 – 26,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR)**
Heavy (Greater than 26,000 lbs GVWR/GCWR)**
Did this motor vehicle display a hazardous materials (HM) placard?
No
Yes**
Select 1
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.**
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.2
Question
Do you or agree or disagree with the proposed change V8. Motor Vehicle Body Type
Category and HM Display?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
24
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueV10:SpecialFunctionofMotorVehicleinTransport
The 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
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,
Definition
including the driver seat, but not including vans owned and operated for personal use.
Attribute Values:
Subfield 1
00
Special Function
No Special Function
Select 1
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
Bus – School (Public or Private)
Bus – Childcare/Daycare
Bus – Transit
Bus – Charter
Bus – Intercity
Bus – Shuttle
Bus – Other
08
09
10
11
12
Farm Vehicle
Fire Truck
Highway/Maintenance
Mail Carrier
Military
13
14
15
16
17
18
Ambulance
Police
Public Utility
Non-Transport Emergency Services Vehicle
Safety Service Patrols – Incident Response
Other Incident Response
19
20
21
Rental Truck (Over 10,000 lbs)
Towing – Incident Response
Truck Acting as Crash Attenuator
22
23
Taxi
Vehicle Used for Electronic Ride-hailing (transportation network company)
98
99
Other
Unknown
Rationale Important to evaluate the outcome of vehicles used for special uses that are involved in crashes.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.3
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V10. Special Function of Motor
Vehicle in Transport?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
25
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueV14:DifficultyIdentifyingTrafficwaysInvolvingHOVorHOTLanes
The 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
01
02
Travel Directions
One-Way
Two-Way
Select 1
Subfield 2
01
Divided?
One-Way Trafficway
Select 1
02
03
04
05
06
Two-Way Trafficways
Not Divided
Not Divided, With a Continuous Left Turn Lane
Divided, Unprotected Flush Median
Divided, Raised Median Barrier
Divided, Depressed Median
99
Unknown
Subfield 3
00
01
02
03
Subfield 4
01
02
97
Rationale
HOV/HOT Lanes Related?
None present
Select 1
HOV/HOT Lanes
Separated, Flush, Raised or Depressed Median
Not Separated, Painted Pavement Markings, Post-Mounted Delineators
Other
Crash Related Lane Type
General Purpose Lane
HOV/HOT Lane
Select 1
Not applicable
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.4
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V14. Trafficway Description?
26
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Open Text
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
xx
yy
97
Subfield 2
xx
yy
97
Rationale
Undivided Trafficways
Enter the total through lanes in both directions, excluding auxiliary lanes.
Enter the total auxiliary lanes in both directions
Enter 2 Values
Not Applicable
Divided Trafficways
Enter the total through lanes in the vehicle’s direction, excluding auxiliary lanes.
Enter the total auxiliary lanes in the vehicle’s direction
Enter 2 Values
Not Applicable
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.5
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V15. Total Lanes in Roadway?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
27
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
IssueV17:TrafficControlDeviceType
The 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
00
01
TCD Type
No Controls
Person (including flagger, law enforcement, crossing guard, etc.)
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
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
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
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
19
20
21
22
23
Pavement Markings
School Zone
Railroad Crossing
Pedestrian Crossing
Bicycle Crossing
Other Pavement Marking
98
99
Other
Unknown
Subfield 2
01
02
Rationale
Inoperative/Missing?
No
Yes
Select 1-4
Select 1
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.6
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the proposed changes to V17. Traffic Control Device Type?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
28
Type of Response
•
Agree
•
Disagree
•
No Opinion
Open Text
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
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
Select 1-4
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)
29
49
50
Rationale
Utility Pole/Light Support
Unknown Collision With Fixed Object
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.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01 Edit check one
E(GT)#.02 Edit check two
Item #
6.7
Question
Do you agree or disagree with the addition of the attribute End Departure for V20.
Sequence of Events?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
30
•
•
•
Type of Response
Agree
Disagree
No Opinion
Open Text
7. NewDataElementforAutomatedVehicles
Issue:AddressingEmergingAutonomousVehicleTechnology
Automated 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
00
01
02
Vehicle Automation Level
No Automation
Partial Automation
Full Automation
97
Not Applicable/Not a MV
Rationale
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01
E(GT)#.02
Select 1
INSERT HERE.
Edit check one
Edit check two
31
(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
00
01
02
03
04
05
Vehicle Automation Level
No Automation
Driver Assistance
Partial Automation
Conditional Automation
High Automation
Full Automation
99
Subfield 2
01
02
Unknown
Vehicle Automation Use
Yes
No
99
Rationale
Unknown
As motor vehicles become increasingly automated, States will have the ability to measure how the
different levels of vehicle automation affects traffic safety.
Edit Checks:
E(GT)#.01
E(GT)#.02
Select 1
Select 1
Edit check one
Edit check two
32
Item #
7.1
Question
Which version of “Motor Vehicle Automation…” do you prefer, looking at the
ease of use by law enforcement, feasibility, and usefulness?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Type of Response
•
Strongly prefer original
version
•
Somewhat prefer original
version
•
No Opinion
•
Somewhat prefer updated
version
•
Strongly prefer updated
version
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?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
•
Collected at scene
•
Linked
Open Text
7.3
How should the data on Vehicle Automation Use be collected?
•
Collected at scene
•
Linked
Open Text
Please provide a comment to explain your response
33
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 #
8.1
Question
Do you agree or disagree with adding the new attribute value Vehicle Not at
Scene, where appropriate?
Please provide a comment to explain your response
Type of Response
•
Agree
•
Disagree
•
No Opinion
Open Text
9. SuggestChangestotheModelMinimumUniformCrashCriteria
Item #
Question
Do you have any suggestion(s) for improving an existing MMUCC data
element or attribute?
Do you have any suggestion(s) for (a) new attribute(s)?
General Comment on MMUUCC
34
Type of Response
Open Text
Open Text
Open Text