PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of Ratingseven the higher risk users for that matter to use this helmet especially assuming it is expensive seems to be a secondaryproblem for Ohio...■ The tie to hearing perception and collision experience is weak. The paper suggests that visibility might be a bigger factorin motorist/motorcycle collisions.■ Should be performed by helmet manufacturers.■ While motorcycle fatalities are on the rise, and are over-represented, this issue is not as big an issue in our state.Item #130:G-14Addressing Needs of Private Property in the MUTCD(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 4 7 6RAC 7 17 13 7 4 1Standing Committee on Research■ Not a priority. The NCUTCD has some work underway on this.■ This proposal does not seem to solve a current critical problem within the transportation system.■ Considerable work is underway on the application of the MUTCD to private properties.■ (Richard Moeur comment): There's a critical need for research in this area, but this does not seem to be a good problemstatement■ [Rating: 2] Low priority. Use of "surveys" in parking lots cannot definitively establish the necessary criteria. Further,the minimum letter heights on signing in parking facilities can be determined using existing criteria on legibility distance,perception-reaction time, and operating or posted speeds.Research Advisory Committee■ Not applicable to Field Operations■ This is not an issue for WSDOT at this time■ This would benefit all states.Item #131:B-14Does Direct Lighting from Vehicles Affect Nesting SeaTurtles?(17)(46)NR 0 1 2 3 4 5SCOR 5 8 2 2RAC 2 22 15 6 3 1Standing Committee on Research■ This may be a good research topic with a useful application, but authors don't provide a basis for their belief thatheadlights might attract turtles. Authors should have provided more detail on potential methods for determining whetherturtles are attracted to headlights vs. fixed lighting. Authors should consider a pooled fund study with other coastal states.■ Too unique to a few states■ Not of national significance.■ The scope appears more regional than national.■ A real issue for some states, but not all. It appears that collecting the data would cost as much as budgetted.■ Not enough states would benefit to justify an NCHRP project■ In general, this problem statement is better suited as a localized question for areas where sea turtle nesting occurs.IV-95