Homepage Forums ANSI D16 Discussion Ballot Batch 1 Questions and Responses via Email

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #44511
    John McDonough
    Moderator

    Item #1 Background/Rationale:
    1. Examples are the same. Why not use examples only under 2.4.19?
    2. The definition “a nontraffic crash is a road vehicle crash which is not a traffic crash” is poor. One must now look up what a traffic crash is. A better definition would be: “a nontraffic crash is a road vehicle crash where neither the unstabilized situation nor a harmful event occurs on a trafficway.”

    Responses:
    1. We added in both locations to make it as clear as possible because differentiating these are a challenge for a lot of folks.
    2. The structure of that definition is in alignment with a lot of others within D16. As just one set of examples the terms starting at 2.4.10 through 2.4.25 all follow that general structure.
    3. Evaluating the ballot comments, multiple Consensus Members shared this concern.

    Item #3:
    3.) In a motor vehicle crash the occupants of the motor vehicle have non-fatal injuries and the vehicle is at rest. At this point the unstabilized situation has ended. Any subsequent injury from exposure to the elements is part of a new unstabilized situation. Is this really #3? Does it replace old #3? There are 10 examples currently.

    Response: Yes, we were thinking that would be a good spot in the list for it to fit rather than at the end as 11.
    Item #5:

    Just a question—is “disease condition” the right term? Perhaps “physical condition” is better when talking about a stroke, heart attack, etc.

    Response: Maybe we could get some insight from folks on the panel. I’m posting this one to the discussion board for Consensus Members to comment on.

    Item #7:
    1. You also have Item #15 mentioned in the rationale.
    2. You do not have 2.3.5 in the text.
    3. The highlighting of new items is missing at times.

    Response: These are mistakes and we will fix these for the posting. Thanks for the catch!

    Item #8:
    1. Why is (NEW) in the 3rd bullet under exclusions for 2.2.28?
    2. There needs to be a space above 2.5.9.

    Response: Probably should clear that up for the vote. Parking lane/zone has been in D16; however, it was not specifically defined. There is a proposal to add a definition for the term, in which case it would get an identifier. I note we need to fix the term to parking lane/zone in item #11.
    Item #10:
    What is the section number for this?
    Response: It is new, so we haven’t assigned one yet. Any suggestions?

    What does ‘down slope’ mean?
    “A pickup truck traveling on private property adjacent to the trafficway overturns down slope on the private property and comes to rest within the trafficway.”

    Response: Ugh! It’s missing an “a”! Overturns down a slope. Sorry.

    Should I be concerned that the updated definition for 2.4.7 contact vehicle notes ‘non-motorists’ even though the definition for 2.6.2 collision crash only stipulates ‘pedestrians’? I wanted to ask since we’re only seeing items 1-12 in package 1, and you might already address this in packages 2 or 3.

    Response: We don’t have that in the mix, but it is a good catch and something to clarify. If you are good with the suggested update to 2.4.7 contact vehicle, please use the Affirmative w/ comments and note the correction for 2.6.2. We will make that update and share it with the Consensus Body in the wrap-up from the first batch of voting. Thanks!

    Item #8:
    I’m also concerned about parking lane/zone, which is often dynamic. Many local streets allow on-street parking in the travel lane. If a parked vehicle is hit, does that mean it was not in the roadway? Some parking lanes change by time of day (no parking during rush hours).

    Response: We addressed the time-of-day parking in the new definition for parking lane or zone in item #11. For the local street edge of road/curbside parking, that is tied to 2.2.34.2 parked motor vehicle related to being in-transport. Vehicles on the roadway are in-transport whether in-motion or not. If you have any suggestions, please feel free to include them in your vote.

    For bike lanes, they start and stop sometimes. Why would a bike lane not be in the roadway?
    Response: We were trying to address bike lanes that are exclusive for bicycles (not roadway) versus those that are bicycle preferred but also utilized by vehicles to turn, access parking lanes, driveways, etc. Again, welcome to any suggestion here.

    Item #10
    I think a public road is “open to public travel.” So, private HOA roads are “public roads” if they’re open to the public. The term “public authority” is tough to define. Some toll lanes are owned and operated by private companies. Not sure what that means for “public authority.”

    Response: Good point here. We are trying to satisfy a FHWA request and issue of clarification related to what is required by FHWA to be reported by state DOTs for highway funding versus what is used for statistical report of motor vehicle traffic crashes. It is often a question and issue in state counts. Can you please note that in your comment and we can get input from FHWA. I am not sure how a toll road is handled by FHWA if it is not state owned. Come to think of it, the land may be state-owned but the toll road privately operated/maintained. Not sure.

    Item #11:
    …certain hours of the day (parking lane) and for other uses (e.g., regular travel) at other hours (e.g., travel lane).

    Response: If this is a suggestion for clarity, can you add it to your vote? Generally, if you approve of the item but have suggestions that are assistive or clarifying, those can go in the Affirmative w/ Comment. If you have a substantive change to the item, that would be Negative w/ Comment.

    Item #4:
    What if a vehicle’s load detaches or something falls out of the vehicle (e.g., something out of a truck, a bike rack)? What if a wheel comes off of a vehicle?

    Response: For the situation that you describe, it is considered part of the vehicle that it came from for the duration of the unstabilized situation. For example, if logs fall from a pickup carrying firewood and bounce into another vehicle, it is a two-vehicle crash. If the logs fall, nothing happens, and everything stabilizes, that would end the unstabilized situation. If another vehicle subsequently comes upon and hits the logs at rest in the roadway, it would be a separate single-vehicle crash. Generally, this is covered in the definition of a 2.1.4 transport vehicle where it generally states that the vehicle includes things on it, in it, attached to it, or set in-motion by it.
    That said, looking at the draft, it would probably be good to add in something about vehicle parts, like your wheel example.
    Can you please note that suggestion as a comment when you vote?

Viewing 1 post (of 1 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.

Subscribe

* indicates required

Membership Profile