Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
xii Abstract Widespread deployment of Event Data Recorders (EDRs), sometimes called âblack boxesâ, promise a new and unique glimpse of the events that occur during a highway traffic collision. The EDR in a colliding vehicle can provide a comprehensive snapshot of the entire crash event âpre-crash, crash, and post-crash. In 2004, an estimated 40 million passenger vehicles were equipped with EDRs. By carefully collecting and analyzing the details provided by the growing number of EDR-equipped vehicles, state transportation agencies, federal agencies, and the highway safety research community have an unprecedented opportunity to understand the interaction of the vehicle-roadside- driver system as experienced in thousands of U.S. highway accidents each year. State and federal transportation agencies can expect both immediate and longer term benefits from the collection of EDR data. The initial benefit for state transportation agencies will be the use of EDR data from individual traffic accident investigations as a powerful new form of evidence in legal proceedings, e.g. to defend against lawsuits or to recover costs of repairing collision damage to the highway infrastructure. With a more methodical system of EDR data collection, state and federal transportation agencies can expand this benefit to significantly improve the efficiency of database collection for accident statistic databases. For example, in state accident databases designed to meet the Model Minimum Uniform Crash Criteria (MMUCC) format, one-third (24 of 75) of the recommended data elements could be provided by EDRs. In the longer term, one of the crucial benefits of EDRs will be their influence on highway crash safety research. The ready availability of EDR data in an accident statistics database will enable highway safety researchers to address a number of elusive research questions which directly affect state transportation agencies, e.g. the relevancy of the NCHRP 350 roadside safety feature crash test guidelines. State and federal transportation agencies can expect to incur both startup and operational costs associated with EDR data collection. Startup costs will include both the purchase of EDR data retrieval units and training for the accident investigators or law enforcement personnel who will be performing the actual EDR downloads. In addition, EDR data collection will add somewhat to the time required for accident investigation. These costs however are expected to be a barrier to EDR data collection only in the near term. As EDR data becomes more widely used in the courts and as EDRs become more widespread in the passenger vehicle fleet, there will be growing legal incentives for the states to collect EDR data. EDRs are a rapidly evolving and, in many ways, still immature technology. Both the Society of Automotive Engineers and the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers have recently released standards or recommended practices for EDRs. In 2004, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for EDRs voluntarily installed in light vehicles. This NCHRP program has developed several recommendations for enhancement of these devices to meet the specific needs of highway crash data analysis. These recommendations include
xiii the adoption of the standardized set of data elements included in the NHTSA NPRM on EDRs, the addition of a specialized list of data elements which would assist roadside crash safety research, as well as a list of other required improvements to EDR performance and data download methods. Finally, the research program has developed a recommended EDR Database format for state and federal transportation agencies which seek to collect and systematically store EDR data. While the preceding technological issues are challenging, they are solvable. More uncertain are the concerns which have been raised about the legal and public acceptability of the widespread collection of EDR data. Much of the public hesitation to accept EDRs has revolved around the recording of pre-crash data, e.g. vehicle speed, rather than the crashworthiness data, e.g. crash pulse. Pre-crash data can be used to directly evaluate a driverâs responsibility for a crash. This report presents the findings of two special studies, conducted as part of this research program, which specifically examine the legal issues surrounding EDRs and the consumer acceptability of EDR data collection.
