RoadQuake 2™ Temporary Portable Rumble Strip: Road Safety Reinvented!
For speed limits of 75 mph or less, and temperatures from 0° to 180° F.
I have heard this encouragement four different times now this week, through different means: Be strong and courageous.
I needed to hear that. Especially because I have had some hard days of missing AnnaLeah and Mary, at the same time that the task feels overwhelming.
One of the times was just tonight when I searched for a facebook post with a photo of a drawing which Isaac made of Mary at Lake Michigan. I haven’t found it yet. But I did serendipitously find some good treasures recorded in our Journey through Grief Page. They were the best kind of encouragement as we prepare to go to Washington next week.
September 14, 2013:
September 13, 2013:
Here am I, send me! https://www.facebook.com/media/set/?set=a.511293028953216.1073741899.464993830249803&type=1
September 20, 2013:
My what a lot we have learned since then!
September 30, 2013:
October 3, 2013:
April 16, 2014:
I can’t get this out of my head: why are we waiting for states to adopt their own traffic safety standards instead of establishing National Traffic Safety Standards which states are required to adopt? What is this–the Wild, Wild West? We are the united states of America–are we not?
Why on earth don’t we establish National Traffic Safety Standards & require them to be adopted by States? (Advocates for Highway & Auto Safety held a press conference which I watched live-stream. They released their 13th Roadmap of State Highway Safety Laws–outlining the 319 proven safety laws which many states have not adopted, including such things as seat belt usage, motorcycle helmet laws, impaired driving, child passenger safety, teen graduated licensing laws, and distracted driving.)
Should not proven safety standards be applied universally?
Note this statement from the 1934 National Conference on Highway Safety:
The importance of uniform legislative standards in reducing accidents and facilitating the movement of traffic cannot be over estimated, and the adoption of these standards by all States and municipalities is earnestly recommended.
Daniel C. Roper, Secretary of Commerce, Chairman, National Conference on Highway Safety, Washington, DC, July 31, 1934 ACT III – UNIFORM MOTOR VEHICLE CIVIL LIABILITY ACT
Later, Uniform Gudelines for State Highway Safety Programs were released by NHTSA. Where are we with that? Have we moved away from mandating states to adopt specific traffic safety standards? Is it optional? What is working and what is not working at this point?
National Traffic and Motor Vehicle Safety Act
Highway Safety Program Guidelines:
Section 402 of title 23 of the United States Code requires the Secretary of Transportation to promulgate uniform guidelines for State highway safety programs. These guidelines offer direction to States in formulating their highway safety plans for highway safety efforts that are supported with section 402 and other grant funds. The guidelines provide a framework for developing a balanced highway safety program and serve as a tool with which States can assess the effectiveness of their own programs. NHTSA encourages States to use these guidelines and build upon them to optimize the effectiveness of highway safety programs conducted at the State and local levels.
Is this still operative today? If so, why are there 319 traffic safety laws which have not been adopted by states? Is it the duty of the federal government to protect its citizens from crash deaths & serious injuries?
NOTE the connection with federal funds to states:
(2)Waiver.—
(c)Use of Funds.—
(1)In general.—
Funds authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section shall be used to aid the States to conduct the highway safety programs approved in accordance with subsection (a), including development and implementation of manpower training programs, and of demonstration programs that the Secretary determines will contribute directly to the reduction of accidents, and deaths and injuries resulting therefrom. Title 23 › Chapter 4 › § 402 23 U.S. Code § 402 – Highway safety programs
Delayed adoption and implementation of proven safety standards inevitably results in unnecessary, preventable deaths.
I was just reading about this yesterday and noted the multitude of links for this sort of thing:
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) sent a letter telling the FMCSA to remove and limit the number of exemptions the agency grants. The CVSA argues that FMCSA is granting excessive exemptions, which hinder enforcements efforts by creating inconsistency and confusion. TSC has been and continues to be firmly opposed to state or industry exemptions for this very reason. We support the CVSA’s stance on this issue, and also urge the FMCSA to reconsider and reduce the many exemptions it grants to carriers, particularly those pertaining to training and hours of service.
Link to Article: http://www.overdriveonline.com/cvsa-to-fmcsa-scale-back-on-hours-and-other-exemptions/
The Truck Safety Coalition Team
Insightful Public Comment from a Canadian road safety expert on the NPRM for upgrade of Rear Underride:
Regarding the above noted proposed rulemaking, I support fully a new rear guard standard that exceeds the Canadian standard, which was developed some time ago and that current research shows does not provide adequate passenger compartment protection in all crash scenarios. I also support fully that the new standard apply to all trucks including single unit ones. I believe the NHTSA has overestimated the costs and underestimated the benefits of such changes. More importantly, however, we must modernize the very way we think about road safety in the United States and Canada. We need to make the default design for every car, truck and bus to be one that simply minimizes all levels of human harm.
The use of a cost-benefit analysis for motor vehicle design and upgrades represents outdated thinking. The air, marine and rail industries have a much more forward approach when it comes to safety and more often works to ensure that these modes are safe for all persons. We must do the same with motor vehicles as the use of cost-benefit analysis involves assigning a monetary value to a human life and it is unethical and crass to do that.
Thank you for considering my comments on this important matter.
Regards,
Neil Arason
Here are the latest posted Public Comments on the NPRM for Rear Underride Guards.
Six Most Recently Posted Comments at:
Notifications from Regulations.gov
———————————-
DOCKET: NHTSA-2015-0118 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;dct=FR+PR+N+O+SR;rpp=10;po=0;D=NHTSA-2015-0118)
NOTIFICATION NAME:
FREQUENCY: Daily
EXPIRES: 01/11/2017
NUM DOCUMENTS: 6
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0031 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0031)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Stephen Batzer
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0032 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0032)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS)
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0033 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0033)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Stephen Batzer
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0034 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0034)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Aaron Kiefer
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0035 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0035)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Truck Safety Coalition (TSC)
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0036 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0036)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/23/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Neil Arason
I am glad to see that there is an investigation of the problem of “chameleon carriers.” When a trucking company with a history of safety issues transforms itself into a new company in order to keep doing business, guess what is likely to happen?
You guessed it: their safety problems go with them!
Read about it here: WRAL INVESTIGATES ‘Chameleon carriers’ create danger on roads
No surprise to us! We uncovered so many issues in the aftermath of our crash: Our Crash Was Not An Accident
Jerry, Isaac, and I are taking over 19,000 Vision Zero Petitions to Washington, D.C., next week. This time we are not taking them in individual envelopes. Instead, we have compiled a printed book (designed by Isaac) with the 16,516 signatures which we had on February 12–along with:
We will also be making a pdf of the book available. And Care2 (ThePetitionSite) will be printing off all of the petition signatures, as of next week, and delivering them to us in a binder to take to Secretary Foxx.
On March 3 and 4, we have multiple meetings scheduled in Washington to discuss our requests and petition our country’s leaders to take decisive action.
We have also arranged to have a Petition Book delivered to President Obama. When my granddaughter, Vanessa (6), saw the stack of books in my bedroom, she asked why they were still there. I explained that we were going to Washington next week and about the meetings and all of the people to whom we were going to be giving books.
Vanessa remembered going with us to deliver the first petition in May 2014. At 4, she sat quietly and “took notes.” Yesterday, she decided that she wanted to write a letter to the president to tell him that she missed Aunt Mary and Aunt AnnaLeah. So we will be taking that as well.
With the formal Public Comment period on the rear underride rulemaking for trailers now closed, recently-submitted comments have been posted and can be viewed at these links:
Notifications from Regulations.gov
———————————-
The link to the Proposed Rule is here:
DOCKET: NHTSA-2015-0118 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;dct=FR+PR+N+O+SR;rpp=10;po=0;D=NHTSA-2015-0118)
NOTIFICATION NAME:
FREQUENCY: Daily
EXPIRES: 01/11/2017
NUM DOCUMENTS: 9
The most recently-posted comments are individually listed here:
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0022 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0022)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Seven Hills Engineering, LLC.
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0023 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0023)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Randy Gates
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0024 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0024)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Jerry Karth
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0025 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0025)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Courtney Wood
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0026 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0026)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Marianne Karth
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0027 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0027)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Brian Vires
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0028 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0028)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Andy Young
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0029 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0029)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Erin Roth
DOCUMENT ID: NHTSA-2015-0118-0030 (http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0030)
DOCUMENT TYPE: PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
POSTED DATE: 02/22/2016
DOCUMENT TITLE: Comment from Peter Kurdock
We are grateful that Wabash has taken the initiative to improve rear underride protection on the trailers which they manufacture, as seen on their website: RIG-16 REAR UNDERRIDE GUARD SYSTEM
For the past three years, Wabash National has spent considerable time, capital and facility resources in R&D specifically focused on enhancing rear impact guard performance. As part of these efforts, we conducted numerous crash tests, and consulted and worked with some of the premiere testing facilities in the country. The new RIG-16 system is designed to:
Key Design Features
To achieve our performance objectives, our engineering and product development teams incorporated a number of design enhancements that are engineered to work together, as a system, to better absorb energy and deflect impact.
U.S. Patent Application Publication No. 2015/0258951 and other patents pending
See more about this great underride story here: An unexpected phone call from a trailer buyer with good news on underride guards
