I’m very thankful to the people who gave AnnaLeah the opportunity, as a teenager, to care for young children at a weekly Women’s Bible Study as well as at a preschool. She was so good with little ones — able to relate to them and captivate their hearts. At the same time, she was a deep thinker and well-read.
Minolta DSC
At the time, I might have said, “What good experience you’re getting to develop your skills for the future.” In retrospect, it turns out that there was no future for her in which she actually made good use of those skills. In my darker moments, I might even think, “Well, what was the point of all that then?”
All the same, I am glad for AnnaLeah that while she was here, she gave fully of herself. She laughed. She thought great thoughts and wrote inspiring words. She enjoyed her life and through it touched other people, who loved and appreciated her.
AnnaLeah’s time on earth did not prepare her for a life which unfolded into old age. No matter. AnnaLeah’s simple acts of kindness, her winsome ways with little children, her natural gift of storytelling and her ability to draw you into her laughter, along with her pondering of wondrous things. . . these were not meant for the future. They made for richness in the daily moments of her life and now bring to mind treasured memories of the past.
Her greatest adventure is what lies ahead. . . in an infinity of days with her heavenly Father — joy unspeakable. Still, I’m only being honest when I say how unfathomable it is that her life here on earth is over — just like that — and how much I wish it wasn’t so.
I’m sure that I don’t get alerted to every underride crash in this nation. But I see enough of them to frequently re-kindle my frustration with the lack of significant action on this issue. Apparently, no one person feels the burden resting squarely on their shoulders. Hence, we are left with a disturbing absence of a sense of urgency to solve the problem.
You can catch a dismal glimpse of the daily Underride Death Toll (certainly not an exact count) on my Twitter Profile.
When supporters of the STOP Underrides! Act of 2019 first hear the news about DOT’s new “rule on rules,” they might moan and sigh and scramble to figure out what next. On December 5, Transportation Secretary solidified the Trump administration’s approach to rulemaking:
Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao announced she has signed a “rule on rules” that will ensure the department’s regulations aren’t too complicated, out of date or contradictory.
When it comes to investigating suspected wrongdoing and enforcing its regulations, the new rules also require the department “where feasible, foster greater private-sector cooperation in enforcement.”
On the one hand, there are hints of good things there in calling for rules that are not out of date, cooperation from the private sector, and greater transparency. But those who have been around the block in safety advocacy are right to be skeptical and devoid of hope for future traffic safety rulemaking.
Yet I remain hopeful knowing that the STOP Underrides Act fits the bill by calling for a Committee On Underride Protection (COUP), whose role is to gather a diverse group of stakeholders to collaboratively keep DOT truly transparent and progressing in underride rulemaking. Will the COUP be included in the upcoming FAST Act language? I’m doing everything that I can to make it a reality.
Now, understandably, it could cause concern that, “The new Transportation Department action formalized a Trump administration requirement that for each regulatory step a department takes, it has to undertake two deregulatory moves.” However, I’m not worried because I know that it would be procedurally acceptable for the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) to remove the existing 1996 rear underride rules, (two of them — FMVSS 223 & 224), which would satisfy that requirement.
Then, NHTSA could issue a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) as a revision of the December 2015 NPRM underride rulemaking, which was intended to update the 1996 rear underride guard rule. In fact, SNPRMs are a valid means of improving a NPRM — based on Public Comments and new information received subsequent to the initially issued proposed rule.
No one can argue that there has not been plenty of new information on underride which has come to the surface in the last seven years. In fact, the STOP Underrides! Act nicely packages straightforward rules, based on performance standards, to address every form of deadly underride and can easily lead to an Underride SNPRM — all with the help of the Committee On Underride Protection to mold it into the best possible underride protection.
So, in this season of expectant hope, let us eagerly continue a national conversation on the elimination of preventable underride tragedies. Let our goal be to change the face of the trucking industry by making truck crashes more survivable, thus promising a better chance that more people will be home for the holidays.
Members of Congress, Secretary Chao, trucking industry, eager engineers, and families of underride victims, let’s do this together.
(p.s. Let’s also appoint a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman so that motorists and vulnerable road users — victims of every form of traffic violence — can count on a strong voice to authoritatively advocate on their behalf.)
People have died under trucks since passenger vehicles and trucks have shared the road. What changes have we seen in underride protection? Here is a Timeline put together by the Insurance Institute of Highway Safety for the first Underride Roundtable on May 5, 2016.
What’s next? What will the future hold for underride rulemaking? More of the same or significant progress in preventing underride tragedies?
Aaron Kiefer readies his Rear Reinforcement Attachment, an aluminum device installed at the outer edges of a trailer’s rear underride guard to strengthen it — preventing underride to make truck crashes more survivable & save lives.
Making plans for an upcoming crash test in North Carolina. Stay tuned as we work hard to #STOPunderrides!
Why is this needed? See the difference between a weak and strong rear underride guard:
On October 26, 2019, we set up a STOP Underrides! Booth at the North Carolina State Fair as part of the Governor’s Highway Safety ProgramSafety City. Over 90% of the people, who learned from us about the underride problem, decided to sign a paper copy of the STOP Underrides! Petition. Those 270 people are asking Congress to pass legislation which would end these preventable tragedies.
This chart assumes that our observation of overwhelming support from 90% of the fairgoers could be extrapolated to the population of the United States. It provides an estimate of how many people would want action taken to prevent underride if they knew the facts. I calculated the number of projected signers for each state (look for yours) and then added up the total for the entire United States: 277,930,023!
Next week, we’ll be delivering over 8,000 paper petitions (printed from signatures garnered online) to four Congressional Offices in Washington, D.C. (and letting other offices take a peek).
Do you think that they’ll take note of this message from their constituents? Will they do anything as a result? Maybe not, but I’m going to make sure that I do what I can to disturb their sleep.
The fabulous Fall weather brought out thousands of people to the North Carolina State Fair on Saturday, October 26. At the Governor’s Highway Safety Association (GHSA) SAFETY TENT, we were ready for the hundreds of people who stopped at our booth. We seized the opportunity to share with them underride stories, photos, and crash test videos.
We didn’t actually keep track, but I would venture a guess that well over 90% of those who took the time to listen to us, and often ask questions, were glad to hear that there was a specific action which they could take after hearing about the horror of underride and how they and their families are vulnerable to this preventable traffic safety problem.
In fact, after they learned that Congress could take action to mandate that available engineering solutions be installed on all large trucks, 263 people were more than willing to sign a paper copy of our STOP Underrides! Petition.
One young woman got tears in her eyes as she was gazing at our poster:
We learned that some years ago, when she was 12, she and her mom crashed into the side of a trailer and were spared complete underride when a piece of the trailer floor somehow lodged into their car preventing it from going any further. She had no idea that underride happens to others and found it a relief to be able to sign the petition.
She wrote in a comment on her petition: The most important piece of legislation!
North Carolina U.S. legislators would do well to pay heed to this clear call from their constituents:
My son is one of those who experienced sudden unintended acceleration while driving his Toyota Camry on a city street. Thankfully, the circumstances were such that he was not killed or injured. But he could have been.
I was worried about him continuing to drive the car. Would it happen again – only this time with a more dire outcome? Posts I wrote at the time:
Without admitting liability, Toyota since 2014 has settled 537 claims blaming sudden acceleration for crashes that killed or seriously injured people, according to a court document Toyota filed last month. Many, but not all, of the lawsuits asserted that electronic defects were the cause of sudden acceleration.
“Toyota has settled most of them, because there is some indication of something going wrong that doesn’t seem to be explained,” Don Slavik, a plaintiff attorney appointed by U.S. District Judge James Selna to assist in the litigation against Toyota, told FairWarning.
How much Toyota has paid in settlements is not publicly known because the company requires plaintiffs to sign a non-disclosure agreement as a condition of each settlement.
Automotive safety advocates see the complaints as a sign that Toyota and federal regulators failed to properly address the root of the problem when they had the opportunity years earlier. . .
Kane, the car safety consultant, says he continues to field calls from drivers who describe their Toyota or Lexus cars suddenly surging in parking lots. He says that most of these events occur when cars are initially traveling at lower speeds. The cases aren’t serious enough to take to court, but he says that the events make people afraid to drive their own cars and can raise insurance rates if the crashes resulted in property damage.
“It is unbelievable how many sudden unintended acceleration events continue to occur post recall,” Kane told FairWarning. “There are very few high-speed sudden unintended acceleration events, but the lower speeds are a dime a dozen.”
Victims of traffic safety issues clearly need to be represented by an advocate in a position to take significant action to ensure that problems are appropriately addressed. A National Traffic Safety Ombudsman.
On September 3, 1969, according to the Congressional Record from that day, Congress discussed plans to fund and expand the National Traffic & Motor Vehicle Safety Act of 1966. Although we have made progress since that time, still today there are way too many people dying on our roads. We have not made it a national priority to address these deaths and serious injuries.
A National Traffic Safety Act of 2019 would provide a framework for a National Traffic Safety Ombudsman to oversee a Towards Zero Traffic Safety Task Force of diverse stakeholders to collaborate for Safer Vehicles, Safer Trucks, Safer Streets, and Safer Drivers to address the national public health and traffic safety crisis in order to make a significant reduction of the 36,560 annual traffic-related deaths in the United States (2018).
It’s time to provide the documentation to counteract unfounded fallacies and speculations about underride protection.
COMMON MISCONCEPTION: ” A European trailer maker saw trailer failures due to the increased rigidity in the trailer structure from added frame supports for side underride guards, TTMA reported. The trailers were less flexible when operated over uneven road surfaces or on surfaces that produced twisting forces, which led to the trailers becoming disabled during highway use, presenting safety risks to other motorists.” https://www.truckinginfo.com/340949/should-truck-trailers-have-side-underride-guards
RELATED FACTS: 1. ATA is referring to concerns about thekinds of damage experienced by owners of Krone trailers in Europe. A side guard developed by the Krone company in Europe had problems with causing cracks over time in the trailer floor. This has been pointed to by many in the industry as “proof” that no side guard can be designed which will not damage the trailer and cause other safety problems. Please take some time to review this deposition and an excerpt which includes questioning of a Krone representative.
2. You will find that although it was not a technical success, the company chose not to continue developing it due to economic reasons because safety was not their original motivation. At the time they were the only ones trying to stop cars from going under the side of trucks in Europe and they chose not to continue on that path. However, Mr. Sanders was not implying that it would have been impossible to make corrections had they tried.
3. Krone embarked upon a complete curtain-sided trailer redesign, which happened to have a low frame. Clearly the connections and the members weren’t designed/constructed adequately and they had problems. Mr. Sanders says that this experience is not indicative of what will happen when a side guard is added to an existing US-style box trailer.
4. It should be noted that Krone did not design a side guard to go on the side of a trailer, instead they designed a new type of trailer which had side underride protection. It was the trailer design which had technical problems — not a side guard which caused structural problems to an existing trailer design.
5. Also, it is my understanding, from the deposition, that Krone had a working relationship with Wabash Trailers in the U.S. at the time when they were working on the trailer which had a side guard on it. Although Krone made the decision not to continue development of side underride protection on their trailers, Wabash Trailers themselves did R&D work on side guards. In fact, they have showcased their prototype side guard at truck shows in the U.S. in 2017 and 2018. And they have a side guard patent issued in the U.S. on March 14, 2019.
UPDATE, June 19, 2023: Please note that we were able to have a Zoom discussion with the German engineer who designed the system used on the Krone trailers. Here the story from him: Global Underride Discussion.
RELATED FACTS: Attached below is a compilation of all railroad grade crossing accidents compiled by the Federal Railroad Administration for the past 5 years — compiled to address the supposed counter-safety “concerns” expressed by TTMA etc. like railroad hang-ups.
In the last five years for the population of trailers we currently have including the lowboys, car haulers, cattle haulers, beverage trailers, etc there have been ZERO fatalities coded as truck-trailer stuck on track.
Even if one were to assume a side guard at 18 inches high would create more hangups and accidents – and the standards on grade crossings say they won’t – it is just not a statistically frequent fatal or injurious event in comparison to side underrides. Maybe this is why the NTSB, the one responsible for investigating significant rail transport accidents, still recommended side guards for trailers.
RELATED FACTS: 1) Like any new technology, over time the technology will be improved upon and costs will decrease. 2) If reduced payload means more trucks are on the road (although a weight exemption has been entertained and not all trucks run full all the time), some people speculate that there will be more truck crashes as a result. I postulate that those crashes (because of the underride protection which will be on those trucks) will be more survivable and, thus, will not lead to an increase in fatalities. 3) Some say that if there are side guards, when cars collide with the side guard and are deflected, then there may be secondary collisions as a result. I say that any secondary collision will most probably be less deadly because the crashworthy safety features of the cars will be triggered and effective at protecting passengers — unlike what occurs in underride when the crumple zones, airbags, and seat belt tensioners are not able to function as intended. 4) Besides, if a car goes under the side of a truck and keeps going, as Joshua Brown’s Tesla did, it could also lead to secondary collisions.
A comment has been made that a side underride regulation would be putting the cart before the horse due to the limited amount of available alternatives. That brings up the question: If there is an engineering problem in an industry, should we look to the industry to see what they can do about it? Why on earth should they sit around waiting for someone else to solve it for them?! Sadly, that seems to have been the prevailing industry attitude since at least 1969.
Fortunately, in addition to Perry Ponder’s AngelWing side guard and Aaron Kiefer’s SafetySkirt, some trailer manufacturers have been working on development of side underride solutions. But, unfortunately, there has been little to no encouragement given to them by the federal government or other components of the trucking industry to move forward. And potential investors are hesitant to back innovations until they are assured that there is likely to be a market.
