Category Archives: Truck Safety

Past Time for Action

Truck Safety, , ,

IMG_4468

It has recently come to our attention that our petition to the Department of Transportation regarding underride guards will not have been the first one to address this vital issue.

On February 28, 2011, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)* sent a letter to David Strickland, the then-Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), titled “Petition for Rulemaking; 49 CFR Part 571 Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standards; Rear Impact Guards; Rear Impact Protection.” (http://www.iihs.org/iihs/topics/t/large-trucks/reg-documents, #3 in 2011)

The IIHS letter concludes as follows, “In summary, IIHS provides analyses and test results showing that NHTSA could greatly reduce the likelihood of rear truck underride by reopening rulemaking on FMVSS 223 and 224 to:

1. Substantially increase the quasi-static force requirements, at least to levels that would guarantee all guards are as strong as the Wabash;

2. Move the P1 test location farther outboard to improve offset crash protection;

3. Require that attachment hardware remains intact throughout the tests;

4. Require guards be certified while attached to the trailers for which they are designed;

5. Investigate whether the maximum guard ground clearance can be reduced; and

6. Reduce the number of exempt truck and trailer types.

“IIHS urges NHTSA to begin such rulemaking as soon as possible to reduce the preventable injuries and deaths occurring when passenger vehicles strike the rears of large trucks at speeds the passenger vehicles are clearly designed to handle in the absence of underride.”

On April 3, 2014, the National Safety Transportation Board (NSTB) released a document which made Seven Safety Recommendations for Tractor-Trailers to NHTSA—including improvement of standards for rear underride guards. The document made mention of the 2011 petition from IIHS to NHTSA and commented that, “As of December 2013, NHTSA has not formally responded to IIHS’s petition, but the agency has sponsored additional research on rear underride.”

http://www.newsplex.com/home/headlines/NTSB-Issues-Recommendations-to-Improve-Safety-of-Tractor-Trailers-253786341.html

It is clearly past time for action to be taken on this important issue. How many more lives will be unnecessarily lost before those accountable for instigating change will act decisively and make it happen?

* Note: The IIHS is a reputable organization (http://www.iihs.org/ ):

“The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) is an independent, nonprofit scientific and educational organization dedicated to reducing the losses — deaths, injuries and property damage — from crashes on the nation’s roads.

The Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) shares and supports this mission through scientific studies of insurance data representing the human and economic losses resulting from the ownership and operation of different types of vehicles and by publishing insurance loss results by vehicle make and model.

Both organizations are wholly supported by auto insurers and insurance associations.”

 

Underride Guards: What Should We Do If There Really Is a Better Design?

Truck Safety,

The Department of Transportation has regulations for underride guards on trailers. You know what I mean, that thing we have been talking about: the guard on the back of trailers which is supposed to keep a vehicle from sliding under the truck in the event of a crash.

But, too often, these guards don’t do what they are supposed to do. What if there was a better design/better standards than what is currently required? What should we do about it?

Study these photos for yourself. The top trailer has a different design and, in a crash test, the results were significantly different.

PManac vs competitor crash test photos 001

Photos from IIHS Report: http://www.iihs.org/iihs/sr/statusreport/article/48/2/1

and http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4802.pdf

IMG_4465

May 4, 2013, Karth Crown Victoria rode under the trailer

NSTB Issues 7 Safety Recommendations for Tractor-Trailers

Truck Safety,

We are encouraged by the news that the National Safety Transportation Board, on April 3, 2014, released seven recommendations urging the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (part of DOT) to improve the safety of tractor-trailers. We hope that, together with the message that we deliver with our petition on May 5, Secretary Foxx and his administration will take this seriously and make significant changes in a timely fashion.

http://www.newsplex.com/home/headlines/NTSB-Issues-Recommendations-to-Improve-Safety-of-Tractor-Trailers-253786341.html

We do not want to see DOT/NHTSA drag their feet doing more studies when research has already been done. See http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/recletters/2014/H-14-001-007.pdf , starting at page 8 re: rear underride guards and especially on page 11:

“As a result of the research that was published in 2010 and 2011, IIHS submitted a petition to NHTSA requesting that the 1998 rear underride guard standard be upgraded.55 The following changes were requested:

(1) Increase the strength of the guards by modifying testing requirements,

(2) Require that the guards be designed to protect passenger vehicle occupants in collisions that occur with only a portion of the guard (off-set collisions),

(3) Strengthen requirements for attachment hardware,

(4) Require testing each type of guard “while attached to the trailers for which they are designed,”

(5) Determine whether it is feasible to lower the maximum guard ground clearance from 22 inches, and

(6) Include additional types of trucks (i.e., single-unit trucks) and trailers in a revised rear underride guard rule.56

As of December 2013, NHTSA has not formally responded to IIHS’s petition, but the agency has sponsored additional research on rear underride.57”

See the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) 2011 and 2013 Status Reports on underride guards here:

IMG_4518

Our Crown Vic–ready to be towed on May 4, 2013, after an underride crash

Dear Truck Driver,

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, ,

You may feel like our petition is targeting you because we are asking for the minimum levels of insurance required by truck drivers be increased, we are asking for Electronic Logging Devices to become the standard as soon as possible, and we are asking for improved underride guards to be put on trailers.

These things do make your life more difficult. We know that. However, they also help provide safety for everyone on the road including you and your family.

Increasing the insurance does cost you money. But when an accident happens, it costs a lot of money to cover all of the damages a large, heavy truck can inflict. Often times, the minimum insurance doesn’t begin to cover those damages and the burden of paying them can be left on other agencies (including taxpayers) or even on injured people and their families.

Electronic Logging Devices (ELD) make it impossible to work too many hours, and that decreases driver fatigue. We understand that making a living as a truck driver is difficult and this causes some to make changes to their logs in order to make a living for their families. But this is dangerous for all on the roads including the truckers, who decide that it is their best option for making money. While the ELD do cost money, they also make it a lot safer for everyone.

Underride guards don’t directly make a difference for your lives. But, by preventing cars from going under your trailer, it will save lives and prevent injuries.

We understand how it can feel like our petition is going after your livelihood. But, the truth of the matter is that the system needs to change so that you can make a living while still keeping the roads safe. It is important that the roads be safe for you, your loved ones, and ours.

We are asking people to support safety by signing our petition. We respect truck drivers, and we are grateful for the work that you do for us. But the roads need to be as safe as possible. And that will take us all working together to reach that very important goal.

The Karth Family

In memory of AnnaLeah (forever 17) & Mary (forever 13)

What We Are Asking For: Electronic Logging Devices

Truck Safety,

Our petition requests DOT Secretary Foxx to make significant progress on three truck safety issues. One of the issues has to do with electronic logging devices to log truck drivers’ hours of service on the road.

This is what we are asking for with regards to  Electronic Logging Devices:

  • Improve enforcement and reduce truck driver fatigue by immediately releasing the rule for electronic logging devices (ELDs), and by preventing exemptions to hours of service limits;

This is not a matter of passing legislation; it has already passed legislation. It is a matter of moving it through the administrative process as quickly as possible. (See this site for a summary of the process: http://eobr.com/eobr-news/eobr-mandate/eld-mandate-clears-omb/)

For further information about electronic logging devices and exemptions to hours of service, visit the Truck Safety Coalition’s website:  http://trucksafety.org/fmcsa-releases-proposals-electronic-logging-device-rule/

Status of DOT Rule on Electronic Logging Devices

Truck Safety,

Electronic Logging Devices have been mandated by legislation and the DOT rule requiring them has passed an important milestone. Here is a summary of its progress:

 “So, to break down the EOBR / ELD mandate process so far:

The road to the ELD mandate began when Congress passed MAP-21 in June 2012.

The president signed MAP-21 shortly thereafter, requiring the FMCSA to write a rule requiring use of electronic logging devices, or EOBRs, for all drivers that keep a Record Of Duty Status—about 3.1 million trucks and 3.4 million drivers today.

The FMCSA developed a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) that was sent to the Office of the Secretary, who approved it and sent it back to the FMCSA in July 2013.

From there, the rule moved over to OMB, where it cleared today, March 12, 2014.

The FMCSA will keep the rule for the next two weeks, eventually publishing the SNPRM for public comment.

A comment period will then take place, published as 60 days, giving anyone a chance to add their feedback.

The FMCSA will take those public comments and revise the rule, a process that can take between six and nine months.

According to these time frames, we can estimate a final rule to be published in the first calendar quarter of 2015.

Based on MAP-21 requirements, fleets will have two years to comply with these rules—meaning you will be required to implement an EOBR for an Electronic Logging Device by January 2017 at the latest.”

Taken from: http://eobr.com/eobr-news/eobr-mandate/eld-mandate-clears-omb/#more-849

We are thankful for the progress which DOT has made thus far with the Electronic Logging Device rule. However, we don’t want the process to drag out any longer than necessary. Lives are at stake!

headstone

EOBR: Preventing Truck Driver Fatigue through use of Electronic Logging Devices

Truck Safety,

What is an EOBR? It is an electronic logging device, otherwise known as an Electronic On-Board Recorder. What is its purpose? To keep track of a truck driver’s hours of service on the road. The goal is to prevent driver fatigue by making sure that truck drivers get enough sleep and time off of the road.

The current system in place for recording drivers’ hours is a paper logbook. Too often, these are not even checked in the case of accidents because they can too easily be falsified.

“Regulatory requirements for EOBRs have been established by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) and are covered in the FMCSA’s rule 395.15. It requires devices to automatically record a driver’s duty status and any changes in status, as well as the amount of time they operate the vehicle. If requested by law enforcement, drivers must be able to immediately deliver the required display information for the previous 7 days, plus the current day.”

Quoted from this website: http://eobr.com/what-is-an-eobr/

IMG_4458

 

 

 

The Best Possible Protection

Truck Safety, ,

Studies have been done which show that trucks, even if they are equipped with rear underride guards, do not pass all of the crash tests. In fact, out of 8 truck companies tested, only one passed all of the tests: http://www.iihs.org/news/rss/pr031413.html.

So, it may be a true statement, according to The American Trucking Association, “that many manufacturers are producing trucks with better than required safety underride guards.” http://myfox8.com/2013/08/13/families-push-for-tractor-trailer-regulations/ Nonetheless, the bottomline is that there are many trucks which are NOT equipped with the best possible protection, which means that someone somewhere sometime might crash with one of those trucks and not live to know it.

Why would there be resistance to providing the best possible protection? Is it money? Quite possibly… Yet, according to Manac President Charles Dutil, the Manac underride guard “doesn’t weigh 200 pounds more than anybody else’s; it doesn’t cost $200 more,” estimating the difference to be at most 20 pounds and $20.

“If trailer manufacturers can make guards that do a better job of protecting passenger vehicle occupants while also promising lower repair costs for their customers, that’s a win-win,” says David Zuby, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety’s chief research officer. http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4802.pdf

What I want most of all, in this situation, is to help reduce the number of families who open their mail to find a death certificate for a family member because of a preventable death…

        certificates and pens 010

IIHS Report: http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr4802.pdf

IIHS Videos: http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-941654 ;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bT3G-kcKN70&list=PL9F34CB1B15585ED6

Why Are We Writing About Truck Safety Advocacy?

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, ,

Why are we writing about truck safety advocacy? Because we miss AnnaLeah and Mary so much and would like to help make sure that other families are not devastated the way we were.

According to the traffic crash report, on May 4, 2013, our Crown Victoria car was hit by one truck, spun around, hit again by that same truck, and then pushed backwards into the back of another truck. So the rear of our car went under the truck resulting in the deaths of AnnaLeah and Mary, who were in the back seat.

If the standards for underride guards for truck trailers had been strengthened and enforced, then AnnaLeah and Mary might have come home from the hospital with Caleb and me. Maybe not. And nothing will change our circumstances; we will never see them again in this life (so we wait eagerly for the life to come). But certainly, someone else could be spared this grief and untimely death–because we know there is a better design out there.

To get a better understanding of the inadequacy of the current federal regulations for underride guards, please watch these short videos:

http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-941654

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=7358087n&tag=related%3Bphotovideo

Encouraging Words

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, , ,

It is so good to see how people are responding and signing our petition for truck safety. And it is encouraging to read all of the Comments on ThePetitionSite. People care. People are supporting our efforts to improve the safety of travelers on the roads. And, unfortunately, many people have seen the problems firsthand.

I hope to look back at this time in years to come and think: together we made a difference.

AnnaLeah, Mary at Muskegon

(Photo courtesy http://www.thekarths.com/)