It is not often that you get the opportunity to work with a great crew of people (Aaron Kiefer, Marcus Gainer, Quentin Beverly, Robert and James Gilmore, and Hyle Herwick) to accomplish something that is so meaningful, and life-saving. But I was truly blessed today to have that happen.
The Carolina Trucking Academy, owned by Charlie and Donna Gray, has been one of the biggest supporters of our efforts on this journey we have been on for years in helping prevent death by underride. Today we were able to place an AngelWing side guard on one of the Academy’s trailers.
It was, once again, an engineering challenge as the trailer was shorter than the normal 53-foot trailers we normally work with. But Aaron Kiefer — as always — came up with the modifications which were required.
Marcus went to work on the Academy trailer — cutting the holes required in the cross members for fitting the support beams in place. Meanwhile, the rest of us started the process of removing the AngelWing from the underride research/storage trailer and preparing it for its new home on the Academy trailer. Each section of the guard was carefully removed, with every bolt, nut, and washer lined up in readiness for the installation.
With dedicated teamwork, we were able to complete the installation of the AngelWing side guard on the Academy’s trailer. So now this life-saving device will be on the highways and byways in and around North Carolina –demonstrating not only great driver training but also the commitment of Charlie and Donna to have the safest equipment on the road.
Underride Crash Memorials These are posts in memory of a few of the thousands of underride victims. The tip of the iceberg of senseless, preventable deaths. I will slowly be adding more.
What will it take to get UNDERRIDE on DOT Regulatory Agenda? We’ve been waiting 52+ years for DOT to move forward with side guards on large trucks — not to mention improving rear guard regulations and adding front underride protection. After numerous petitions, comprehensive underride rulemaking still has not made it the onto the DOT Unified Regulatory Agenda.
Collaborative Discussion of Side Guard Challenges on Specialty TrucksI was very pleased with the collaborative discussion which took place via Zoom on Monday, March 29, 2021, regarding the challenges of adding side guard safety technology to specialty trucks. Participants included primarily engineers and small companies who have been working on researching, designing, and/or marketing solutions to the underride problem. The meeting was also quietly observed by families of underride victims and administrative officials from the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA).
The March Madness of Competing Traffic Safety InterestsWhat is it like to compete for the attention of government leaders in order to get traction on the traffic safety problem which took your loved one’s life? Envision a press conference on a hot topic where a cacophony of reporters can be heard shouting out — vying for the opportunity to have their question be the one that gets answered.
Time for a National Traffic Safety OmbudsmanAlmost five years ago, after delivering a Vision Zero Petition to leaders in Washington, D.C., I realized that we need something more than a White House Vision Zero Task Force and a National Vision Zero Goal. We need a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to be at the helm of a nationwide network of community traffic safety advocates. Someone who will have a place at the federal table — with the authority to take ongoing action on behalf of vulnerable victims of vehicle violence.
Engineers, Trucking Industry, & Victim Advocates Collaborate at Side Guard Task Force On a Friday afternoon — February 26, 2021 — over 50 people met via Zoom to discuss comprehensive underride protection. The purpose of the meeting was to report on progress which has been made by several subcommittees since an earlier meeting in 2020 — including Industry Engagement, Research, and Engineering Subcommittees.
Should we be concerned about side guards getting hung up on railroad tracks?I keep hearing members of the trucking industry bring up the possibility of side guards on trailers getting hung-up on railroad tracks. They point to it as a reason to not require side guards on all new trucks. Is that a valid concern? And where is their documentation?
Transport Companies Provide Feedback on Side Guard Operational IssuesWe know that the trucking industry has expressed concern about potential operational issues which could occur when side guards are installed on large trucks. In order to address those concerns, we asked several trucking companies to give us feedback about their experience after installing side guards on their tractor-trailers.
Consensus Side Guard StandardOn April 17, 2020, over 40 people participated in a virtual meeting of a volunteer Underride Protection Committee’s “Side Guard Task Force.” This included two engineers from trailer manufacturers. As a follow-up, several subcommittees began to hold virtual meetings, including an Underride Engineering Subcommittee.
FMCSA Proposed Rule For Inspection of Rear Underride Guards A red letter day: The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) at long last has proposed a rule to add rear underride guards to Appendix G. What does that mean? It means that rear underride guards will be required to be in good condition in order to pass an annual vehicle inspection. Once the rule is actually issued.
Retrofit Solutions for Rear Impact Guards to Prevent Deadly UnderrideIt is to their credit that nine U.S. trailer manufacturers have improved their rear underride guard design to meet the IIHS TOUGHGuard standard and seven of them are putting it on all new trailers as Standard. What that means is that they have surpassed the current federal standard and have been crash tested to show that they are more likely to prevent underride and catastrophic Passenger Compartment Intrusion (PCI) — thereby more likely to save lives when passenger vehicles rear end tractor-trailers.
Save Lives by Lighting up Tractor-Trailers & Tanker TrucksTruck drivers can play an important role in making sure that the trailers which they haul are as visible as possible to other drivers on the road — especially at nighttime. On October 15, 2018, Leslie and Sophie Rosenberg lost their lives when they collided with the side of a tanker late at night.
Truck Driver Mistakes Don’t Excuse Industry & Government Negligence To Solve Underride ProblemThanksgiving Eve, another apparent underride victim lost her life: Though the truck driver may have made a mistake, not all the blame rests with him for a crash which might have had a different outcome with effective underride protection. Carriers, trailer manufacturers, DOT, & Congress can make these kinds of truck crashes more survivable.
A fully-guarded trailer hits the road – ready to STOP underride! Engineering ingenuity and a lot of hard work went into the research, development, and installation of this fully-guarded trailer system. This week, a small carrier in North Carolina became part of our pilot program. We are thankful that they have agreed to provide us feedback on this #SaferTruck as they drive it on the road to carry out their transport business.
On August 19, we hosted another Underride Staff Briefing — this time via Zoom. We are providing Congressional Offices with the PowerPoint pdf from that presentation, including comments from engineers with expertise in underride as well as underride families: Underride Briefing PowerPoint pdf (inc. links to resources & video)
Underride Crash Memorials These are posts in memory of a few of the thousands of underride victims. The tip of the iceberg of senseless, preventable deaths. I will slowly be adding more.
RAMCUP.Roya, AnnaLeah & Mary Comprehensive Underride Protection.They paid the price:
The American people, whether they know it or not, have already waited too long for DOT to take decisive action to stop underride tragedies. That’s why it’s encouraging to see Congress putting DOT on notice to move forward with the Underride Mandate. Yesterday, they sent a letter to Secretary Buttigieg:
Congressman Steve Cohen (TN-09) and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand led 25 of their colleagues in a letter urging Department of Transportation (DOT) Secretary Pete Buttigieg to swiftly execute the provisions from their Stop Underrides Act, which passed in the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act.press release
The letter encourages DOT to act swiftly to release the Final Rear Underride Guard rule with IIHS TOUGHGuard strength and issue an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPRM) in order to allow the Public to comment on side guards, as well as urging them to, “expeditiously establish the Advisory Committee on Underride Protection and to complete the life-saving side guard research which we hope will lead to a proposed rule on side guards. Together these provisions will help save lives and aim to prevent passenger compartment intrusion from crashes with trucks.”
Senator Gillibrand summarized it well, “Every day we don’t act, we are losing an opportunity to save the lives of innocent Americans.”
I’m grateful that the U.S. Department of Transportation announced their National Roadway Safety Strategy (NRSS) on January 27, 2022. Like others, I’ve waited a long time to hear that news.
“We cannot tolerate the continuing crisis of roadway deaths in America. These deaths are preventable, and that’s why we’re launching the National Roadway Safety Strategy today – a bold, comprehensive plan, with significant new funding from President Biden’s Bipartisan Infrastructure Law,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “We will work with every level of government and industry to deliver results, because every driver, passenger, and pedestrian should be certain that they’re going to arrive at their destination safely, every time.” U.S. Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg Announces Comprehensive National Roadway Safety Strategy, January 27, 2022
While U.S. DOT has many tools at its disposal and will shoulder our responsibility, this must be a coordinated effort with our stakeholders across the public sector, private sector, advocacy, and research communities. National Roadway Safety Strategy, USDOT, January 2022
On the other hand, I heard strikingly similar rhetoric when Secretary Foxx spoke about the Toward Zero Deaths initiative in March 2015, as well as when NHTSA launched the Road to Zero Coalition in partnership with the National Safety Council on October 5, 2016 (more than a year after we launched our Vision Zero Petition). Here are some relevant quotes:
“We embrace the vision of Toward Zero Deaths; it provides an overarching and common vision that drives and focuses our efforts to achieve our shared goal to eliminate injuries and fatalities on our roadways,” said U.S. Transportation Secretary Anthony Foxx. “The U.S. Department of Transportation will do our part by aggressively using all tools at our disposal – research into new safety systems and technologies, campaigns to educate the public, investments in infrastructure and collaboration with all of our government partners to support strong laws and data-driven approaches to improve safety.” AASHTO introduces Toward Zero Deaths Plan to reduce roadway fatalities, 3/10/2015
Deja vu. And what has changed? In any case, here we are. So let’s talk about how the NRSS could be applied to a specific traffic safety issue — truck underride. One Safe System principle included in the NRSS is Redundancy:
Redundancy is Crucial. Reducing risks requires that all parts of the transportation system be strengthened, so that if one part fails, the other parts still protect people.
The Safe System Approach emphasizes that redundancy is critical, and safer roadways mean incorporating design elements that offer layers of protection to prevent crashes from occurring and mitigate harm when they do occur.
This sounds exactly like the combination of crash avoidance technologies (along with improving driver behavior) to prevent crashes from happening, plus underride protection to reduce injuries when crashes do occur. In fact, I’ve previously written about that very topic:
The reality is that crash avoidance technologies cannot prevent all crashes. Even though crash avoidance technologies may be able to reduce speed at impact, they doesn’t necessarily prevent a collision from happening in every instance. In fact, when collisions do occur between a passenger vehicle and a large truck — even at 15 mph — they will likely result in deadly underride and Passenger Compartment Intrusion unless effective underride protection has been installed on the truck.
The NRSS uses the word zero 16 times, including here:
Zero is the only acceptable number of deaths on our highways, roads, and streets. The United States Department of Transportation is committed to taking substantial, comprehensive action to significantly reduce serious and fatal injuries on the Nation’s roadways.
U.S. DOT recognizes the Safe System Approach as encompassing all the roadway safety interventions required to achieve the goal of zero fatalities, including safety programs focused on infrastructure, human behavior, responsible oversight of the vehicle and transportation industry, and emergency response.
Therefore, I will expectantly draw the conclusion that the redundancy principle and the goal of zero fatalities will spur the US DOT to carry out their responsibility to oversee the transportation industry and thereby issue comprehensive underride protection rulemaking — front, side, & rear, on both tractor-trailers and Single Unit Trucks. To do otherwise is hypocrisy.
Will it be necessary for me to continue to ask the question: Is every death unacceptable? Were my daughters’ lives considered worth saving — along with countless other victims of Death By Underride? Is #ZeroTrafficDeaths meaningless rhetoric? Or, is it possible that I can count on the Department of Transportation to prioritize the saving of lives by issuing comprehensive underride rulemaking in which cost benefit analysis is no longer weighted in favor of industry?
Likewise, can I expect when NHTSA is informed of potential safety defects that they will proceed with formal investigations — no matter how many deaths and serious injuries have been reported?
As I contemplated the work ahead of the Department of Transportation and the trucking industry to advance side underride protection, I realized that the lack of a standard for side guards could be a problem. Actually, that is why we gathered together a group of engineers in 2020 to tackle the development of a Consensus Side Guard Standard. But there is a history to the decades-long effort that led up to this which I feel is important to document here:
This is a Timeline of activities leading up to the development of a Consensus Side Guard Standard. It provides a detailed overview of the multiple individuals and organizations who have contributed to raising awareness, researching, and collaborating to create a standard which the government can require and the industry can adopt to bring an end to preventable side underride tragedies.
My hope is that this resource will be reviewed, studied, and turned to as the Underride Initiative moves forward in the coming year. Let’s not reinvent the wheel but rather — with a sense of urgency — let’s build upon the work which has gone before us.
This timeline is not an exhaustive record of all the people who have played a part in advancing underride awareness, research, and protection. There are many people not mentioned here with whom I’ve crossed paths and many who worked on this problem long before I ever became aware of it. Much of that is chronicled in the thousands of posts written on this website.
They are all part of a nationwide, in fact international, Underride Initiative. Thank you, TEAM Underride, for your hard work and dedication to this cause.
We are so thankful for the many people who have contributed over the years to developing effective underride protection. This video was created in gratitude for their hard work. It provides only a brief glimpse and leaves out many people who should rightly be included in this Underride Hero Hall of Fame. Credit goes to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety for their tour guide’s description of the IIHS underride crash testing efforts at their Ruckersville, Virginia, research & testing facility.
Today is #MLKDay. Mary loved that day because it was a special holiday which she liked to think was in honor of her — Mary Lydia Karth. And Mary loved holidays. Unfortunately, her life was abruptly ended after only fourteen celebrations of that holiday. It was “an unfair fight” on May 4, 2013 — our car against a tractor-trailer with a too-weak rear underride guard.
Karth crash scene, May 4, 2013
The National Association of Mutual Insurance Companies (NAMIC) recently wrote about our story, our advocacy, and that Unfair Fight which has already claimed too many lives and continues to do so nearly every day:
We’re hoping that insurance companies will catch the vision that they, too, can play an important role in advancing underride protection by providing financial incentives for installing the best possible protection. Let’s end this unfair fight and STOP Underrides!
In 2020, I became aware of further proof that underride regulatory analysis was both flawed and non-transparent. For some reason, in 2017, the FMCSA contracted with the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center to carry out a Study of Truck Side Guards to Reduce Pedestrian Fatalities. Originally the study goals were listed on the website like this:
Five key tasks are included in this project: (1) study interaction of a potential side guard with other truck parts and accessories (e.g., fuel tanks, fire extinguisher, exhaust system) and the implications for a new Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulation; (2) investigate applicable international side guard standards; (3) perform a preliminary cost-benefit analysis of truck side guard deployment; (4) propose recommendations; and (5) propose means for voluntary adoption.“
When I found out that there were no plans to publish the completed study results, I made multiple inquiries at DOT and Congress. Some months later, after Departmental multimodal review, the results were whittled down to a literature review and finally published here:
When I realized that the majority of the report was missing, I submitted a FOIA Request asking for a copy of the entire report but was denied due to Exemption 5:
Exemption 5 protects the integrity of the deliberative or policy-making processes within the agency by exempting from mandatory disclosure opinion, conclusions, and recommendations included within inter-agency or intra-agency memoranda or letters. Exemption 5 also exempts from disclosure draft documents and recommendations or other documents that reflect the personal opinion of the author rather than official agency position. Finally, Exemption 5 exempts from disclosure deliberative records that may cause public confusion where the information were not the basis for an agency’s action or final report .
Any reasonable person could look at the conclusions from the published study and compare the data to the literature referenced and realize that there were problems. Here’s a fact sheet outlining the apparent flaws in the report published by FMCSA in May 2020:
A flawed conclusion and inconsistent crash analysis cut the apparent Vulnerable Road User safety benefit of side guards by approximately half.
This is bad. This is wrong. In the first place, the error leads to a flawed cost benefit analysis for underride rulemaking. In the second place, even the undercounted underride deaths for Vulnerable Road Users (pedestrians, cyclists, motorcyclists) – to the best of my knowledge – have not been included with data on underride deaths in prior NHTSA underride regulatory analysis. Really flawed cost benefit analysis.
Logic says that a flawed cost benefit analysis will lead to a faulty conclusion. The conclusion from multiple underride rulemaking efforts in the past has been that a regulation is not cost effective. In other words, those lives which could have been saved by underride regulations were not deemed worth the cost.
And, by the way, what exactly was the rationale behind leaving out information from the original study? What was DOT concerned about revealing? Would it have actually justified a side guard regulation, which would, of course, have not been looked on very favorably by many in the trucking industry? Would the study have provided a broader look at additional advantages of side guards, including their ability to increase aerodynamic fuel savings, spray reduction, wind stability, GHG reduction, or other accompanying side guard benefits?
As far as I can tell, NHTSA’s faulty analysis has resulted in “guidance” to the industry which effectively turned a blind eye to the fact that trucks with a dangerous design indisputably allow cars and Vulnerable Road Users to go under trucks and sentence thousands of road users to Death By Underride.
To compound the problem, at least in recent years, underride rulemaking has been assigned to the Crashworthiness Standards division of NHTSA in the USDOT. In my opinion, that is not a good fit. The majority of rulemaking done by NHTSA has to do with the auto industry, whereas FMCSA is the agency charged with motor carrier safety.
Furthermore, underride protection doesn’t fit the definition of crashworthiness, namely, “the ability of a car or other vehicle to withstand a collision or crash with minimal bodily injury to its occupants.“ Underride protection is installed on trucks but does not protect truck occupants. So the trucking industry gets away with claiming they’re not responsible to take care of the problem. And it isn’t a feature of the car whose occupants need to be protected, so the automakers don’t have any responsibility. Consequently, underride protection doesn’t truly fit into the current NHTSA division of responsibilities as far as I can tell. The result: on top of industry opposition, underride rulemaking seems doomed because, organizationally, it falls between the cracks.
It appears to me that this complex issue would be better suited as a multimodal collaborative project under the coordination of the Office of the Secretary rather than buried at NHTSA without suitable input from other agencies and the yet-to-be-established Advisory Committee On Underride Protection. Maybe then the Underride Initiative would get the priority status it requires and All Road Users would finally be protected from Death By Underride.
Oh, look, DOT just published their priority Innovation Principles, including this one:
The Department should identify opportunities for interoperability among innovations and foster cross-modal integration. In addition, DOT’s posture must remain nimble, with a commitment to support technologies that further our policy goals.
Will the U.S. DOT let the flawed analysis stand? Or will the coming year see significant progress in underride rulemaking? Secretary Pete, the final determination will be in your hands. Will you decide that comprehensive underride protection is warranted?
Not only have we lost two daughters due to a weak rear underride guard, but we continue to see countless loved ones lost to other families in a similar way. Senseless deaths. Solutions are available — developed by innovative engineers but too often left on the shelf while people continue to die.
I get Google Alert notifications of truck crashes every day. Here are the rear underride fatalities which I have found in the last few months:
Anyone, who observes a rear underride guard in an obvious state of disrepair, can report it to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) via their online National Consumer Complaint Database. Make note of the name of the trucking company. If possible, memorize its DOT# and get a photo of the guard. Then follow these step-by-step instructions for reporting this truck safety hazard as soon as possible:
Here are some examples of rear underride guards in disrepair — a condition which weakens their ability to stop a car from riding under the truck in the event of a collision:
Millions of trucks on the road have rear underride guards which are already too weak to prevent deadly underride. When they are not properly maintained, their strength is reduced even further.
See the DIFFERENCE:IIHS crash tests of weak & stronger rear underride guards
As of December 9, 2021, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) is requiring that trucking companies monitor the condition of the rear underride guards on the back of their trailers. Truck drivers should look over this safety equipment when they do a pre-trip inspection. If this Rear Impact Guard has not been properly maintained, the trucking company and the truck driver could receive violations with fines attached at the time of annual vehicle inspection due to a Final Rule published by the FMCSA.
If a truck fails the inspection, the violation could cost a motor carrier a maximum of $15,876 and a truck driver $3,969. This could lead to the replacement of many rear underride guards — hopefully, with guards that meet the TOUGHGuard level of strength proven possible by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety and now on many new trailers.
Motorists who notice guards in questionable condition can help to make sure that this important regulation gets enforced by using this tool to report them to the U.S. Department of Transportation:
Let’s hope that trucking companies and truck drivers will take responsibility themselves to properly maintain this safety equipment and even go so far as to replace outdated equipment with the stronger retrofit kits which are available thanks to innovative engineers — at a cost less than that of fines!
