PART IV: Summary of Comments - SCOR/RAC

PART IV: Summary of Comments17-May-10Reviewer Comments Distribution of RatingsPerhaps more appropriately, local statistics should be collected regarding impacted populations of nesting sea turtles.Then this information could be reviewed to determine if there is a need for this project on a regional scale.■ Possible candidate for pooled fund study with better background information.■ Important, but generally localized issue.■ [Rating: 3] The study would have to be well designed to differentiate any effects of fixed lighting from the vehicle lights.Has FWS identified this study as a concern for sea turtle hatchlings?Research Advisory Committee■ It really only benefits a few states. They should seek some type of a shared funding pool for this type of study.■ WSDOT does not have nesting sea turtles and agree with the NCHRP review comment that this study should be fundedby a consortium of coastal states that have nesting sea turtles.■ Study is of regional interest - a pooled fund study might be more appropriate■ May be appropriate for a TPF project, but not a national need; not appropriate for NCHRP.■ This seems more appropriate for a pooled fund of relevant states rather than a NCHRP study.Other■ [Rating: 1] Although the Committee finds the study very enticing, we suggest that it would be better funded on alocalized level such as a state pooled fund. The study is not nationally focused and only a hand full of state would benefitfrom the results.IV-96