Category Archives: Truck Safety

More information on Underride & the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

AnnaLeah and Mary, Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

That’s exciting. I woke up to a comment on our website related to my post about the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations.

Here’s the comment:

The United States has been involved with WP.29 since its inception; however, the Forum originally focused on developing standards for Europe. It has only been a truly global effort since the late 1990’s. The US (NHTSA and the EPA) has been a major contributor to international research and development efforts, but when it comes to specific regulations, the US legal system operates under different principles from Europe.

The US was the first nation to set up a regulatory system for vehicle safety. Ralph Nader and others saw the issue as one of consumer protection and product liability while Europe later addressed safety more as an engineering and product certification issue. As a result, we have two main approaches (self-certification and type approval) and there are two international agreements (1958 and 1998) to allow for uniform regulations. Under the 1998 Agreement, WP.29 establishes Global Technical Regulations (GTR) that can be used under any system. (UN Regulations can only be used under a type approval system.) So at the international level, a state-of-the-art standard for rear underrun protection would involve looking at the current regulations in use around the world to see if the harmonization of requirements through a GTR would be practicable and beneficial. John Creamer, globalautoregs.com

John Creamer is the founder of GlobalAutoRegs.com and a partner in The Potomac Alliance, a Washington-based international regulatory affairs consultancy. In his client advisory role, Mr. Creamer is regularly involved with meetings of the UN World Forum for the Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations (WP.29). Previously, he has held positions with the US International Trade Commission and the Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association (representing the US automotive supplier industry), as the representative of the US auto parts industry in Japan, and with TRW Inc. (a leading global automotive safety systems supplier).

I just emailed John to see what else I can find out from him about this possibility for world-wide collaboration on improving protection against deadly underride. Stay tuned.

(Just so long as it does not get in the way of forward progress meanwhile!)

Negotiated Rulemaking

In memory of AnnaLeah and Mary (and so many others). . .

Never forgotten

A Mother’s Journey Through Grief Brings Hope For Preventing Underride Truck Crashes-Andy Young

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

Energy absorbing bumpers, crumple zones, and seatbelts could not save the lives of backseat passengers, 13 year-old Mary and 17 year-old AnnaLeah. They were traveling in a four-door sedan driven by their mother, Marianne Karth.

Highway traffic slowed to a stop as the Karth sedan was hit from behind by a semi-truck. The first impact spun their blue, four-door sedan 180 degrees. The same semi-truck’s momentum caused a second impact which shoved the Karth sedan backwards underneath yet another truck’s trailer. The rear bar on the second truck’s trailer was not strong enough to prevent the Karth vehicle from going underneath. The rigid structure of the trailer’s steel frame effortlessly shattered the back window, which failed to protect the back of the Karth girls’ heads and bodies. AnnaLeah died instantly. Four days later, Mary died as a result of her catastrophic injuries.

None of the car’s manufactured, safety engineering made a difference to save the lives of Marianne’s daughters. Why? Because the dynamics of the crash resulted in a truck underride.

Little did Marianne Karth know at that moment, on May 4, 2013, that she would become one of the nation’s leading truck safety advocates working toward meaningful prevention of underride truck crashes.

Read more here: Broken Glass And Shattered Lives – A Mother’s Journey Through Grief Brings Hope For Preventing Underride Truck Crashes  by Andrew Young

We were privileged to have Andy serve as the awesome panel moderator at the Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016, at IIHS.

Andy Young and Marianne Karth

 

Millions of good reasons to adopt a National Vision Zero Goal & Appoint a Traffic Safety Ombudsman

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

There are millions of good reasons for the United States to adopt a National Vision Zero Goal and to appoint a Traffic Safety Ombudsman to oversee the pursuit of that goal. Millions of potential saved lives that is–over the coming years here in the U.S. and in the countries who might well follow in our footsteps (if they don’t get there before us).

There are so many examples of why we should do this thing of vital importance and here are just a few which I found this morning as I briefly checked my email and Twitter:

Why on earth don’t we take a unified approach to going about the business of saving lives?!?!?!!?!?!

Why on earth don’t we establish National Traffic Safety Standards & require them to be adopted by States?

What would I do if I were the National Traffic Safety Ombudsman? I dare you to read it and find out. In fact, I hope you do and that it inspires you to come up with some ideas of your own.

Who should we blame if we continue to plod along and pretend that we are doing everything possible to reduce preventable and  unimaginable tragedies? Well?!

President Obama Crash Deaths

Stoughton Trailers values safety & provides improved rear underride protection at no additional cost.

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety

ccjdigital reports on Stoughton Trailers upgraded rear underride guard.

The article discusses Stoughton’s new rear underride guard, which was tested at IIHS on May 5, 2016, as part of the Underride Roundtable and performed well in the 30% offset crash at 35 mph. I would like to see them tested at higher speeds to see how they perform under more severe conditions.

An excerpt from the article:

“After thorough testing, we are confident that this design will set the new standard for rear underride safety in our industry,” said Stoughton Trailers President and CEO Bob Wahlin. “We place such a high value on the safety of both our customers and the driving public that we have chosen to provide this improved level of safety and performance as a standard feature — and at no additional cost.”

The company also said the underride guard design complies with all U.S. and Canadian regulations. In December, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration proposed a rule that would require underride guards on the back of all trailers. Most trailers sold in the U.S. – 93 percent according to NHTSA – already comply with the proposed rulemaking.

I appreciate Stoughton’s stated commitment to safety and their ability to provide greater protection at “no additional cost.” I hope that that serves as a powerful precedent.

But can they meet the conditions of the Australian proposed underride rule which we will be discussing at the follow-up meeting on June 24 at IIHS in Arlington from 10:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m.? That’s what I would like to know.
Raphael Grzebieta from Australia will be making a presentation so that we can determine whether Australian proposed standards would make sense for the U.S. Gary Fenton, from Stoughton, will be participating in that meeting. Should be interesting. . .
Additionally there will be other underride issues to consider as well, including side and front underride/override, conspicuity (adequate marking for visibility), parking of tractor-trailers (leading to greater likelihood of crashes), maintenance, and enforcement. Resolution of each of these issues could lead to additional saved lives.
Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 148Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 168
Jerry’s letter to Stoughton’s CEO, Bob Wahlin, in January 2014, in which he asked for improved guards:  Stoughton trailer manufacturer letter

What would I do if I were the National Traffic Safety Ombudsman?

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

I have proposed that the President establish an independent Office of National Traffic Safety Ombudsman–untainted by political pressures–to be an advocate for all things related to moving our country toward zero crash deaths & serious injuries.

This morning, I was thinking about one of the many traffic safety issues and all of a sudden thought, “Okay, so what could a Traffic Safety Ombudsman do to address this problem?” That made me want to write down ideas for what I would do if I were the National Traffic Safety Ombudsman.

I would (not necessarily in this order as this will be a stream of consciousness listing of random thoughts):

  1. Set up a hotline for traffic safety concerns.
  2. Set up a procedure for responding to the concerns reported to the Traffic Safety Hotline–including a means of communicating with the person reporting the problem (if desired).
  3. Set up a system for keeping track of reported problems and how they were handled.
  4. Set up regular communication with safety advocacy groups.
  5. Set up regular communication with other stakeholders.
  6. Prioritize the traffic safety concerns.
  7. Group the traffic safety concerns into categories.
  8. Organize periodic Roundtables for various categories of traffic safety concerns–involving all relevant stakeholders.
  9. Research globally for information on the traffic safety problems and resolutions.
  10. Set a National Vision Zero Goal (if not already done).
  11. Establish a National Vision Zero Task Force (if not already done).
  12. Coordinate the Vision Zero Task Force.
  13. Identify how the three branches of the U.S. government can and need to be involved in advancing traffic safety and helping to move us toward zero crash deaths and serious injuries.
  14. Develop strategies for tapping into government involvement as a means of carrying out the role of protecting its citizens.
  15. Organize a national network of Vision Zero Community Action Groups. Start with a pilot group and develop the model.
  16. Work with the appropriate departments to develop the details of Vision Zero Rulemaking policies.
  17. Develop strategies to raise awareness of traffic safety issues.
  18. Develop strategies to solicit public participation in identifying creative solutions to traffic safety problems.
  19. Develop strategies to get the public appropriately involved in the rulemaking process related to traffic safety issues.
  20. Develop creative ways to honor the memories of traffic victims.
  21. Develop strategies for utilizing available technology for tapping into traffic safety resources, individuals, and organizations.
  22. Develop strategies for collaborating nationally and globally to advance cutting-edge use of technology.
  23. Facilitate cross-departmental collaboration on traffic safety issues.
  24. Foster pro-active preventive thinking related to traffic safety issues.
  25. Handle auto safety defects more effectively to prevent tragic unnecessary deaths.
  26. Hold manufacturers liable for their decisions and actions.
  27. I’m sure that I’ll think of more ideas later.
  28. I’m also sure that someone will jump to the conclusion that my ideas are unrealistic and unworkable. I’d like to see that put to the test!
  29. Always remembering the goal: preventing people from having their lives unncessarily cut short!Ombudsman for Traffic Safety

More on Traffic Safety Ombudsman

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

.

FMCSA ANPRM re: Eval. of Truck Drivers for Sleep Apnea; Public Comment Period ends 7/8/16

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , , ,

Take advantage of the opportunity to comment on FMCSA’s rulemaking — extended through July 8, 2016, on this Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking:

Evaluation of Safety Sensitive Personnel for Moderate-to-Severe Obstructive Sleep Apnea A Proposed Rule by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration and the Federal Railroad Administration on 03/10/2016

Tired Trucker Roundtable

Make a comment here: Federal Register: regulations.gov on sleep apnea & truck drivers

World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

Detlef Alwes, an engineer from Germany, suggested to me that the U.S. should discuss underride protection with the World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations. I had never heard of it before. Apparently, the U.S. has not had much involvement with it in the past–at least not as far as underride protection.

But doesn’t it make sense to collaborate with other countries and come up with the safest possible vehicle regulations?

Most countries, even if not formally participating in the 1958 agreement, recognise the UN Regulations and either mirror the UN Regulations’ content in their own national requirements, or permit the import, registration, and use of UN type-approved vehicles, or both. The United States and Canada are the two significant exceptions; their UN regulations are generally not recognised and UN-compliant vehicles and equipment are not authorised for import, sale, or use in the US, unless they are tested to be compliant with US car safety laws, or for limited non driving use (e.g. car show displays).[4]

“The World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations is a working party (WP.29)[1] of the Inland Transport Division of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE). It is tasked with creating a uniform system of regulations, called UN Regulations, for vehicle design to facilitate international trade.

WP.29 was established on June 1952 as “Working party of experts on technical requirement of vehicles”; the current name was adopted in 2000.

The forum works on regulations covering vehicle safety, environmental protection, energy efficiency and theft-resistance.”  World Forum for Harmonization of Vehicle Regulations

Other links:

Negotiated Rulemaking

Interesting article on need for more consumer participation in federal rulemaking process.

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety,

I am glad to see that the federal rulemaking has become more open to participation by those upon whom it has the most impact. I only hope that our Vision Zero goals will be genuinely considered and implemented to the benefit of us all.

Along that line, I just found this interesting article from 2013 which outlines the history of participation in the federal rulemaking process.

As a policymaking process, rulemaking is a civic paradox in two senses:

1. It often has substantial direct effects not only on industry but also on individuals (including small business owners), state and local government entities, and non-governmental organizations. Yet relatively few people know about rulemaking, and even fewer understand how it works.

2. Rulemaking’s formal legal structure is an open government ideal: it has broader transparency requirements and public participation rights than any other form of federal decision-making. Yet only a limited range of stakeholders—principally, large corporations and trade and professional associations—take advantage of their right to review the information on which an agency is making its decision, or effectively exercise their right to comment on the merit of the proposed rule.

Rulemaking 2.0: Understanding What Better Public Participation Means, And Doing What It Take to Get It1 by Cynthia R. Farina2 & CeRI3, March 1, 2013

And I am looking forward to the upcoming publication of the article on Visual Rulemaking by two law professors, with the inclusion of the story of AnnaLeah and Mary and our efforts to impact truck safety rulemaking. Elizabeth Porter & Kathryn Watts, Visualizing Rulemaking, N.Y.U. L. Rev. (forthcoming 2016).

Responsibility

 

 

Important Follow-up to the Underride Roundtable, June 24 at IIHS: The Work Continues

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

We have scheduled a follow-up meeting to the Underride Roundtable on Friday, June 24, at 10:00 a.m. at the IIHS offices in Arlington, VA. Further details will be shared when available.

We will mainly be discussing the proposed Australian underride rule with a presentation by Raphael Grzebieta from Australia. It is our hope that this will help the United States assess the relevancy of Australia’s progressive work to the future of underride rulemaking for improved protection in our country.

News of this proposed rule:

Other topics — relevant to our goal of reducing underride crashes, fatalities, and severe injuries — will be addressed to some extent, including side and front underride/override, retrofitting, SUTs/exempt trucks, conspicuity, parking.  Future meetings are anticipated in order to continue working on the preventable underride problem.

In addition to the underride rule from Australia, comments from Detlef Alwes of Germany should be carefully reviewed by anyone who holds responsibility for advancing underride protection. This is the most important point which he has made to me over & over in his communication with me via email:

Real energy absorbing underrun protection crash structures or deformation zones on commercial vehicles should become standard, as they have been on passenger cars for decades.

Here is a presentation on underride protection prepared by Detlef: Proposal for an Energy Absorbing Underrun Protection System for Commercial Vehicles

After observing the webcast of the Underride Roundtable, Detlef also made the following recommendations which he would like shared with interested parties in the United States who bear responsibility for the advancement of underride protection.

“In my opinion the following points should be addressed for rulemaking:
  • real energy absorbing underrun protection system design (the current UP systems are rigid structures to be avoided).
  • lateral proof loads to be considered in design and testing.
  • instead of dot-like test loads, the test loads should be defined area-like distributed.
  • the test collision speed should be higher (just in Germany, the collision velocities are much higher than these of the current crash tests because most highways have no speed limitation).
  • the ‘Follow-up Underride Roundtable’ should develop Underrun Protection Guidelines and discuss them on UN/ECE level (WP29). “

Detlef’s last recommendation should be given serious consideration, as underride protection is not unique to one country or another. Saving lives is saving lives.

The UN/ECE level (WP29) aims for worldwide technical harmonization of vehicles: The worldwide technical harmonisation of vehicles is governed by two international agreements – the 1958 Agreement and the 1998 parallel Agreement. These agreements establish harmonised requirements at global level to ensure high levels of safety, environmental protection, energy efficiency, and theft protection. Both agreements help eliminate existing technical barriers to trade and prevent the creation of new ones. The involvement of the EU enables easy access to non-EU markets for manufacturers.

This is Detlef’s experience with this kind of collaborative process:

This suggestion is based on my experience in another field: I was the German representative in an international committee for space debris mitigation (IADC: Inter-Agency Space Debris Coordination Committee). The 11 members of the space leading nations have developed the so-called ‘Space Debris Mitigation Guidelines’.

These Guidelines have been presented to the UN, to the Scientific Subcommittee of UNCOPUOS (UN Committee on the Peaceful Uses of Outer Space). In this Committee the UN Guidelines for Space Debris Mitigation have been worked out and ratified. It was confirmed by the Committee that this process was very effective and very fast – exemplary. The initiative was started by US (NASA), Europe (ESA) and Russia.

It would be great, if we could establish also such an international committee to develop underrun protection guidelines, which we present to the UN/ECE WP 29. The Proposal to the WP 29 can be put on the agenda by the heads of delegation of the represented nations. Maybe such a process can be started by the initiative of you, the IIHS, the NHTSA and others. According my experience, the German governmental authorities will not be initiative to start. They will follow if it works no longer differently.

His reaction to the Virginia Tech team was this:

Yes, I followed this presentation. At the beginning, I thought that there are good concepts but than I was a little bit disappointed about the chosen reference concept, which is near the conventional barriers with small energy absorbing struts. It is a pity that a more effective underride protection system is owed the opinion that it gets too expensive. My suggestion is to start with a realistic energy absorbing underride protection system, and when effective, one can continue with mass and cost saving measures.

I asked Detlef what he thought of crash testing at higher speeds:

Me: I don’t know if you noticed in the webcast, but I raised the question multiple times about why we were not testing at higher speeds and could we please do so. 

Detlef: Yes, I noticed that, and I fully agree. I am wondering that the ADAC in Germany is testing also at 56 km/h, corresponding to 35 mph. That is not very realistic,  just were in Germany on most highways is no speed limitation, and therefore in most cases the collision velocities are much higher, although if a braking action in the last moment has been taken.

Detlef: Some organisations require higher proof loads, to which bumpers have to withstand. This means that the bumpers of the trucks become stiffer and stiffer. Actual bumpers have to withstand these static dot-like proof loads in longitudinal direction and may break if they are exceeded. This should not be the intention for a crash compatible partnership between the trucks and passenger cars. Decades of discussions in international committees have failed to develop bumper technology beyond what it was in the 1950s. The message should be: Energy absorbing underrun protection structures on commercial vehicles should become standard, as they are on passenger cars for decades.

Detlef watched the Underride Roundtable livestreaming and had submitted a question about oblique impact to the panel discussion:

 

I hope the sketch will express what I mean. In the case of an oblique impact on the reaqr side of a truck, the lateral test loads/forces are not defined, only the longitudinal loads/forces in P1, P2 and P3. The damage in the case of an oblique impact can be higher than in the case of an impact in the direction of the longitudinal axes.

Oblique Impact Drawing Detlef Alwes

Offset tests show that the passenger car is turning due to the offset of the Center of Gravities of both cars. But also in this case, the lateral loads/forces are not considered in the regulations.

Underride is a decades-old problem. I look forward to a future less plagued by such preventable tragedies.

Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 034 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 080Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 032 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 024

Underride Roundtable Timeline Victim families by Underride Timeline Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 169 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 141 Underride Roundtable May 5, 2016 008 Roundtable Display Table Nurenberg, Paris, Heller & McCarthy ALMFTS facebook banner

All of these crashes share one thing in common – a FedEx truck was involved.

Truck Safety,

The Truck Safety Coalition has pointed out a disturbing trend:

FedEx Crashes:

We wanted to bring to your attention several disturbing crashes that have occurred recently. There are several contributing factors that caused these crashes, such as double tractor-trailers, fatigue, and failure to stop in time. But all of these crashes share one thing in common – a FedEx truck was involved.

Pennsylvania: FedEx truck hits Wayne Valley H.S. school bus on class trip to Dorney Park. . .  http://newjersey.news12.com/news/fedex-truck-hits-wayne-valley-h-s-school-bus-on-class-trip-to-dorney-park-1.11886818

Texas: I-30 Reopens After FedEx Truck Crashes, Spills Fuel. . .  http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/local/FedEx-Truck-Crashes-Shuts-Down-I-30-in-Dallas-381080171.html

 Mississippi: FedEx [double trailer] truck involved in Highway 78 crash. . .  http://www.wdam.com/story/31961768/fedex-truck-involved-in-highway-78-crash

California: CHP Details Deadly Big Rig Crash on I-10 in Cabazon (FedEx double tractor trailer). . . http://patch.com/california/banning-beaumont/least-one-killed-cabazon-big-rig-crash-i-10-chp-0

Tennessee: FedEx [double tractor trailer] driver issued fatigue citation after 8-vehicle crash on I-24. . . http://wkrn.com/2016/05/05/crash-on-i-24-w-near-ohb-causing-significant-delays/

 Texas: 18-wheeler crash shuts down I-35 in Salado (FedEx double tractor-trailer). . .  http://www.newswest9.com/story/31556016/18-wheeler-crash-shuts-down-i-35-in-salado

Tennessee: Answers sought after FedEx [double trailer] truck captured swerving for 60 miles on I-40 (no crash, but watch video). . . http://wkrn.com/2016/06/08/answers-sought-after-fedex-truck-captured-swerving-for-60-miles-on-i-40/

Vision Zero GoalTraffic Safety Ombuds