Category Archives: Truck Safety

Casualties of the car safety wars

My grandson just turned 10 years-old. Lately I’ve been noticing little things that show me how much he is maturing and taking responsibility. And I keep thinking how proud AnnaLeah and Mary would be of him. They both spent so much time with him from the time he was born.

gertie 264Minolta DSC

One thing Marcus asked me about the other day was when he saw my copy of the book Car Safety Wars by Michael Lemov. Car safety wars, he asked?  So I had to try and explain it. I asked him what a war is and what happens in a war. And we talked about how it’s a war because while we’re “fighting for” some things to make cars and roads safer, other people are fighting against them.

Imagine.

AnnaLeah would have been 21 now and Mary would be turning 17 in a few weeks. But they’re not. And at least part of the blame for their deaths by preventable vehicle violence can be attributed to “car safety wars”. They, and countless others, paid the price. Casualties of the traffic safety war.

Car Safety Wars

“Our grandma wants to make the roads safer.” Remembering 2 girls in the aftermath of a truck crash

When it comes to safety, is compromise our only option?

Deadly underride can happen to anyone at any time. Even to the best driver in the safest car.

According to the American Trucking Associations, there are currently 12 million trucks on the road. Most of those trucks have weak and ineffective underride guards. Hopefully, government regulators and the trucking industry will take steps to make future trucks safer to be around.

But they aren’t likely to do anything about the 12 million trucks already on the road–even though there is safety technology to do so. You’ll just have to take your chance that you won’t be at the wrong place at the wrong time.

So, why is it that we are powerless to do anything except agree to whatever the trucking industry is willing to do? Whose lives are we willing to give up to pay the price by settling for less than the best?

Is compromise our only option?

If only

instead of like this: IMG_4464

Request for Law Review Articles on the Cost/Benefit Analysis in Traffic Safety Rulemaking

After losing our two youngest daughters, AnnaLeah (17) and Mary (13), due to a truck underride crash on May 4, 2013, our family has taken on the goal of improving the regulatory and voluntary standards for currently weak and ineffective truck underride guards. On May 5, 2016, we were co-sponsors, with IIHS and the Truck Safety Coalition, of an Underride Roundtable.

Current truck underride regulations too often do not prevent underride crashes—which led to 228 recorded crash fatalities in 2014. https://annaleahmary.com/2016/04/truck-underride-fatalities-chart-from-the-fars-1994-2014/truck-underride-fatalities-1994-2014/

As we have participated in safety advocacy, we have become aware of the challenges often faced by those who seek to bring about greater safety through legislative or rulemaking means. Because we have observed that the industry’s lobby exerts a great deal of influence and has been successful in delaying proven safety measures, we have petitioned the federal government to adopt a Vision Zero Rulemaking Policy.

In order to understand the details of our vision to bring about a process that would truly be concerned about saving lives more than saving profit, please see our Vision Zero Petition Delivery Book:

https://annaleahmary.com/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/Vision-Zero-Petition-Book-3rd-Edition.pdf

Also available from Lulu Publishing: http://www.lulu.com/shop/marianne-karth/the-vision-zero-petition/paperback/product-22648853.html

Also, read these Vision Zero Rulemaking posts: https://annaleahmary.com/tag/vision-zero-rulemaking/

We have not received any feedback from the White House or from the Department of Transportation in response to our petition. Therefore, we are proceeding to call upon experts in law to research this timely topic and write law review articles to shed light on the appropriateness of our requests to re-shape the process through which this country’s citizens are meant to be protected.

It is our hope that students of the law, as well as law professors, judges, and legal practitioners, will take it upon themselves to clarify the process by which safety measures – which are proven to save lives and/or prevent serious injuries – are determined to be cost effective or not, and what exactly that means. We will compile the results (or links to published articles) and make them publicly available.

This Call for Research & Review is available as a pdf: Request for Law Reviews on Cost Benefit Analysis in Rulemaking

Please send questions and submissions to:
Marianne Karth
marianne@annaleahmary.com.

2 crash deaths

CBA Victim Cost Benefit Analysis Victim

We will accept reviews at any time but encourage law students to incorporate this project into their university schedule. Please share this post with others whom you think would be interested in this opportunity to change the face of traffic safety rulemaking.

Current NHTSA #Underride Rulemaking (Cost/Benefit Analysis): Summary of Public Comments

I originally set out to highlight comments relative to the flaws in NHTSA cost/benefit analysis. While the document which I put together does that, it actually has much more as it has a link to each of the Public Comments on the currrent underride rulemaking — with some of the highlights copied and pasted from the Federal Register.

It is an incomplete document and could have been done better but it took forever as it is and I hope that it will prove useful to someone.

These are the links to the rulemaking documents themselves:

Here is the Summary Document of the Public CommentsSummary of Public Comments on Underride Rulemaking.

UPDATED, July 22, 2016. Here is the above document revised with links that are clickable! Cost Benefit Public Comments on Underride Rulemaking

If only

Instead of like this:

IMG_4465

UMTRI Reviews Opposition to Proposed & Proven Truck Underride Prevention Measures

Back in 1989, the University of Michigan Transportation Research Institute examined features proposed for improving truck safety. In other words, they reviewed NHTSA underride rulemaking from years past.

What they discovered was that a proposed underride rule in 1977 was opposed by practically “the entire trucking industry – both manufacturers and haulers.” The authors of this study noted “that failure to implement a rule on underride guards took place despite extensive research indicating their expected effectiveness.”

Like they still do today, the industry tried to turn “the discussion around by stating that underride avoidance should be looking at other measures”–ones that they would not be required to implement. “In particular it called for improving and modifying auto front ends to increase their energy absorbing capacity ‘. . . and protect them when they strike bridges, trees, other cars, and other objects, as well as trucks.'”

Today they are still raising the same sort of objections to improving underride protection:

“The trucking industry and manufacturers are not sure stricter federal regulations are needed – especially since many are voluntarily using tougher underride guards.

‘Underride guards are helpful in reducing the impact of cars crashing into trucks. We would however much prefer to see NHTSA focus on providing automobiles with the capability of preventing cars crashing into trucks,’ said Ted Scott, director of engineering for the American Trucking Associations, Inc. ‘Crash or collision avoidance technology can go a long [ways] in helping to eliminate rear end crashes. Educating automobile drivers on how to share the road with a truck is also very helpful in reducing rear end collisions.’ 

Today, I was discussing that article with my husband. Jerry commented that the Tesla underride crash clearly causes that argument to go out the window. A car with the most advanced collision avoidance technology still could not avoid a deadly side underride.

Note: I appreciate the progress made in underride prevention by at least 4 major trailer manufacturers. And I appreciate the involvement in our Underride Roundtable by many members of the trucking industry. Ted Scott was the first one to say that he would participate in one when it was still just an idea in my head and is also participating in the follow-up efforts to reach a unified consensus recommendation to NHTSA.

But that does not mean that I will stop seeking further action (even when it requires standing firm against controversy) when so much more can be done to save lives.

17hxmi

17hxhyTruck Underride Kills

SIGN  & SHARE the TRAFFIC SAFETY OMBUDSMAN Petition:  End Preventable Crash Fatalities: Appoint a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman

Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2015 Show a 7.7% Increase to 35,200 Deaths

Does a 7.7% hike in crash deaths indicate a problem–requiring a solution? Or is it just me?

A statistical projection of traffic fatalities for 2015 shows that an estimated 35,200 people died in motor vehicle traffic crashes. This represents an increase of about 7.7 percent as compared to the 32,675 fatalities that were reported to have occurred in 2014, as shown in Table 1. From NHTSAEarly Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2015

This page shows the change in crashes by region of the country and crash/person type:  Crash Stats by REGION and CRASH TYPE_ Early Estimate of Motor Vehicle Traffic Fatalities in 2015

Charts on that page show that truck crash fatalities have gone up by 4%, pedestrian fatalities by 10%, and fatal crashes involving young drivers by 10%.

What more will it take to convince us that traffic safety needs to be a priority and that potential crash victims (you and I) need a strong voice to advocate on their behalf?

17hou5

Why on earth am I asking for another government-funded worker — a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman? And whatever would that person do anyway? Read more here:

SIGN  & SHARE the TRAFFIC SAFETY OMBUDSMAN Petition:  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/384/321/600/end-preventable-crash-fatalities-appoint-a-national-traffic-safety-ombudsman/

2,200 more people died from traffic crashes than in 2014? 2,200 more families struggling with unimaginable grief?

FedEx denies request for underride safety research donation of decommissioned 53′ trailer

The trucking industry needs to answer the same question which Senator Robert Kennedy posed to GM in 1965: “What was your profit in 2015? And how much money did you spend on safety research in 2015?”

GM’s answer was a safety expenditure figure that was below 1% of their total profit. Which, in my book, makes “safety” a meaningless word.

Yesterday, I received a reply from FedEx, after following their procedure for requesting a donation. Our non-profit, AnnaLeah & Mary for Truck Safety, completed a FedEx charitable assistance application in which we asked them to donate a used, decommissioned 53′ trailer to be used for underride research.

Like in the research undertaken this spring by Aaron Kiefer to crash test his innovative side/rear underride guard protection system. Like the kind of safety measure which could have prevented Joshua Brown from being killed when his Tesla underrode the side of a trailer.

They denied our request. What was FedEx’s reason for denying our request? FedEx email denying safety research trailer donation request

Good day Marianne,

Thank you again for contacting FedEx Freight for charitable assistance. We applaud the work AnnaLeah & Mary for Truck Safety is doing.

After careful review, unfortunately, we must decline your request for the donation of a 53′ trailer.

FedEx Freight works directly with manufacturers and national organizations to support road safety for both our team members and the motoring public.

We wish you success with future endeavors.

Sincerely,

Iris

Iris Coetzee, Senior Communications Specialist

Bah humbug! I would like to know exactly how they work directly with manufacturers and national organizations to support road safety. Spell it out for me. Tell me exactly:

  • How much money they spend on safety.
  • and what percentage that amount is of their total profit.
  • and exactly what that money actually goes for.

I would like to know that information about the whole trucking industry which has opposed and resisted improved underride protection for decades resulting in countless dead people who didn’t have to die if only the trucking industry had acted in a timely and responsible way. And not just for 2015, but for every year since the underride problem was discovered.

I put together a chart for recording that kind of information juxtapositioned against some of the major life events which occurred for me during all of the years when — for the most part as far as I can see the trucking industry did practically nothing “to support road safety for both our team members and the motoring public” — at least in the area of underride prevention. And when they did, it was because we put pressure on their pocketbook.

I’d like to see some investigative reporter dig up this kind of information because I doubt that the industry would give it to me.

11wjd2

 

 

Draft Dem. Platform: “Ensure Health & Safety…Gun Violence Prevention” But NOT Vehicle Violence

See the latest road safety message from Lou Lombardo:

Dear Care for Crash Victims Community Members:

 The DRAFT Democrat Platform contains the following subjects:

“Ensure the Health and Safety of All Americans

  • Universal Health Care 
  • Community Health Centers
  • Prescription Drug Costs
  • Medical Research
  • Drug and Alcohol Addiction
  • Mental Health
  • Reproductive Health, Rights, and Justice
  • Public Health
  • Violence Against Women and Sexual Assault
  • Gun Violence Prevention” 

On page 25 one can read:

“Gun Violence Prevention

 With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe.

We will expand background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws, hold irresponsible dealers and manufacturers accountable, keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons—off our streets, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, domestic abusers, other violent criminals, and those  with severe mental health issues.”

 Hmnn…. Both are important.

But NHTSA has recorded a 9.3 % increase in [crash] fatalities in early 2015 to a level of nearly 35,000 Americans dying every year now.

In addition, every day nearly twice as many Americans suffer serious injuries such as brain and spinal cord paralysis due to vehicle violence than to gun violence.  See
http://www.careforcrashvictims.com/blog-GunViolenceandVehicleViolenceThoughtsonFathersDay2016.php

So why are Democrats so silent on ending vehicle violence?

 Campaign finance money?

 Automotive (Dems & Reps): $15 million See https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/

Gun Control (Dems): $1.7 million in 2015   See  https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=Q12Gun Rights (Republicans): $11 million in 2015  See  https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=Q13

So what are Americans who are concerned with ending vehicle violence to do this election year?

 Lou Lombardo

So why am I not surprised? This has got to change!

See my previous post on President Obama’s apparent perspective on vehicle violence: Obama (6/1/16): “We used to have really bad auto fatality rates. . .” And we don’t NOW?!

Mad Mary

SIGN  & SHARE the TRAFFIC SAFETY OMBUDSMAN Petition:  https://wh.gov/i6kUj

PLEASE NOTE: If you sign the petition, be sure to go to your email. We the People will send you an email which will say this in the subject line:  “Almost done! Verify your Petitions.WhiteHouse.gov account.” Follow the instructions to verify your signature.

Vision Zero Nationwide Network of Traffic Safety Advocacy Groups: Communities Working to Save Lives

Vision Zero Nationwide Network of Traffic Safety Advocacy Groups:                  Communities Working to Save Lives

Well, that’s a mouthful. But it is, in a nutshell, a description of one of the strategies which a Traffic Safety Ombudsman could initiate, organize, and facilitate across communities in this country. The efforts of one person multiplied through a ripple effect — harnessing grief and awareness and outrage into a powerfully-effective force for change.

Fresh out of college, I was hired to be the director a local chapter of a statewide nursing home patient advocacy non-profit organization. I worked within the West Michigan community to mobilize families of nursing home patients and other interested community members and professionals to act on behalf of vulnerable nursing home patients. I consulted with and learned from the official Michigan Long-Term Care Ombudsman.

I envision a similar strategy for mobilizing  citizens and workers across the United States to effect traffic safety measures in a more consistent and timely fashion at the local, state, and federal level. MADD (Mothers Against Drunk Drivers) are organized in a similar manner. These groups would have as their purpose eliminating preventable crash deaths and serious injuries from ALL known (and currently unknown) causes.

Why do it this way? Because just about any other way is more likely to get dragged out in such a way that it will inevitably result in MORE DEATHS & SERIOUS INJURIES.

Time wasted = Tragedies

This is not, of course, the only strategy which the Traffic Safety Ombudsman would employ. But it is one which is not currently being undertaken by anyone else.

Other posts on community action groups:

Other strategies can be found in other posts on this website: Tag Archives: Traffic Safety Ombudsman

See what a Canadian road expert thinks that a Traffic Safety Ombudsman could do: Neil Arason

179438Irreversible & Regrettable

SIGN  & SHARE the TRAFFIC SAFETY OMBUDSMAN Petition:  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/384/321/600/end-preventable-crash-fatalities-appoint-a-national-traffic-safety-ombudsman/

 

Neil Arason, a Canadian road safety expert, shares his thoughts on a Nat’l Traffic Safety Ombudsman

I asked Neil Arason, a Canadian road safety expert, about his thoughts on the idea of a Traffic Safety Ombudsman. This is what he shared with me. . .

Hi, Marianne,

I think what you do right now is very close to that of an ombudsman.  I can’t tell you how critical it is to have safety advocates. Most changes happen because of them.

If I think of good examples of road safety advocacy, they include people like you, and also Clarence Ditlow.  Government needs to know people are watching them, and advocates do a good job of getting issues out into the mainstream media and that is extraordinarily powerful and important.

An office of the ombudsman would be similar to an advocacy centre except typically it is an arm of government, albeit one that has some independence.  We need to have safety advocates who are completely independent and powerful, and then on top of that as many other tools and structures for change.

I think that a traffic safety ombudsman would be one more thing that would help the overall cause. Because it is essentially an arm of government, however, it will likely be much more difficult to set up, whereas Ralph Nader just went ahead and set up the Center for Automotive Safety (directed by Clarence Ditlow), and that was that. (Although Nader had some startup capital from events that began in the late 1960s.)

Nonetheless, anyone can get into the business of advocacy and set up a centre or whatever they end up calling it.  Advocacy groups work toward wholesale change in the very way that road safety is treated, the priority given to it, etc.

The ombudsman type offices, I am aware of, exist so that folks can take complaints to them, and then the Ombudsman (and its paid staff) investigate those complaints with a view to resolving them. The ombudsman works to ensure “fairness” really in decision-making. I’m not aware of any examples of how an ombudsman would work in traffic safety because I am not aware of such a function today.

When people have complaints about some road safety failure, they largely take them to lawyers it seems. I am aware of examples of the role of the ombudsman in other government sectors like income assistance, where a citizen makes a complaint and goes to the ombudsman. This works well because the government agency really stands up and notices when they get a call from the office of the ombudsman, and they really make an effort to resolve the issue.

A traffic safety ombudsman could investigate complaints with a view to making large policy changes.  I would imagine that many victims’ families have no idea at first how to navigate the system. Access to an ombudsman could not just help to investigate their complaint for them, but could give them all manner of advice about where to go and what to do, e.g., use a lawyer, go to media, lobby directly, point them to various agencies for help, etc., etc.

Imagine if the ombudsman had people like you who could share with them what they know about how to get things done. The ombudsman could, I suppose, be a bit of an “information broker” in addition to its role as complaint investigator.  Such an office might help people to direct their energies in ways that will do the most amount of good.

I’m no expert on any of this, that is for sure, Marianne.  The only thing I know, from my own experience, is that almost all changes come from outside government and from advocates, lobbyists and the media.  These are the powers that governments all around the world seem to respond to. To follow then, we need as many mechanisms as possible to support more lobbyists, advocates, and media to focus on road safety.  An ombudsman would help enormously with that.

I hope some of this helps in some way.

Neil

Thank you

SIGN  & SHARE the TRAFFIC SAFETY OMBUDSMAN Petition:  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/384/321/600/end-preventable-crash-fatalities-appoint-a-national-traffic-safety-ombudsman/

What are we waiting for