Tag Archives: NHTSA rulemaking

Underride Rulemaking: Will we get it right this time?!

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

Now this makes me mad!  I just found an IIHS Status Report from March 29, 1977:  http://www.iihs.org/externaldata/srdata/docs/sr1206.pdf

March 1977 IIHS Status Report on Underride Problem

IIHS was reporting on a meeting that took place on March 16, 1977 — three days before I got married! That’s almost 39 years ago — long before any of my 9 children were born, let alone my two youngest daughters, AnnaLeah and Mary!

The government and industry apparently didn’t get underride rulemaking right then! And they clearly hadn’t gotten it right by May 4, 2013 — when Mary and AnnaLeah died from truck underride! But they better watch out, because I am not going to sit by and watch while thousands more die for no good reason!

See the testimony in May 2009 by the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety, in which they call for tougher underride guard standards and with an attachment of the history of federal rulemaking on underride guards (pasted below): http://tinyurl.com/phlaqon

“The history of Federal rulemaking on truck underride guards:

  • 1953 Interstate Commerce Commission adopts rule requiring rear underride guards on trucks and trailers but sets no strength requirements.
  • 1967 National Highway Safety Bureau (NHSB), predecessor to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), indicates it will develop a standard for truck underride guards.
  • 1969 NHSB indicates it will conduct research on heavy vehicle underride guard configurations to provide data for the preparation of a standard. In the same year the Federal Highway Administration publishes a proposal to require trailers and trucks to have strong rear-end structures extending to within 18 inches of the road surface.
  • 1970 NHSB says it would be “impracticable” for manufacturers to engineer improved underride protectors into new vehicles before 1972. The agency considers an effective date of January 1, 1974 for requiring underride guards with energy-absorbing features as opposed to rigid barriers.
  • 1971 National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) recommends that NHTSA require energy-absorbing underride and override barriers on trucks, buses, and trailers. Later in the same year NHTSA abandons its underride rulemaking, saying it has “no control over the vehicles after they are sold” and “it can only be assumed that certain operators will remove the underride guard.” The Bureau of Motor Carrier Safety (BMCS), predecessor to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, considers a regulatory change that would prohibit alteration of manufacturer-installed equipment. This would nullify the major reason NHTSA cited for abandoning the proposed underride standard.
  • 1972 NTSB urges NHTSA to renew the abandoned underride proposal.
  • 1974 US Secretary of Transportation says deaths in cars that underride trucks would have to quadruple before underride protection would be considered cost beneficial.
  • 1977 IIHS testifies before the Consumer Subcommittee of the US Senate Commerce Committee, noting that devices to stop underride have been technologically available for years. IIHS tests demonstrate that a crash at less than 30 mph of a subcompact car into a guard meeting current requirements results in severe underride. IIHS also demonstrates the feasibility of effective underride guards that do not add significant weight to trucks. IIHS petitions NHTSA to initiate rulemaking to establish a rear underride standard. The agency agrees to reassess the need for such a standard and later in the year announces plans to require more effective rear underride protection. BMCS publishes a new but weak proposal regarding underride protection.
  • 1981 NHTSA issues a proposal to require upgraded underride protection.
  • 1986 IIHS study reveals that rear guards designed to prevent cars from underriding trucks appear to be working well on British rigs.
  • 1987 European underride standard is shown to reduce deaths caused by underride crashes.
  • 1996 NHTSA finally issues a new standard, effective 1998.”

IIHS, 2009

I also found this underride research article tonight from 1998:  http://papers.sae.org/982755/

Mariolani, J., Schmutzler, L., Arruda, A., Occhipinti, S. et al., “Impact Project: Searching for Solution to the Underride Problem,” SAE Technical Paper 982755, 1998, doi:10.4271/982755.

“Rear underride crashes kill thousands of people yearly worldwide. Underride guards did not follow the progress achieved by the automotive safety technology. . .”

And now, here we are in 2016: http://www.regulations.gov/#!docketDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118.

Let’s get it right this time. Somebody’s life depends on it. Lots of somebodies.

Underride Roundtable coming up soon: https://annaleahmary.com/2015/10/underride-roundtable-save-the-date-may-5-2016/

Donate to our underride research here: https://www.fortrucksafety.com/

Missin’ you, AnnaLeah & Mary. . .

Share our Vision Zero Petition in memory of AnnaLeah & Mary:  http://www.thepetitionsite.com/417/742/234/save-lives-not-dollars-urge-dot-to-adopt-vision-zero-policy/

“Our grandma wants to make the roads safer.” Remembering 2 girls in the aftermath of a truck crash  https://annaleahmary.com/2015/11/our-grandma-wants-to-make-the-roads-safer-remembering-2-girls-in-the-aftermath-of-a-truck-crash/

“Death & Big Data: It’s time for NHTSA to get in on the action – in the interest of saving lives.”

Safety Advocacy,

Roger Lanctot points to the increase in traffic fatalities in 2015 and raises timely questions:

“Nothing focuses peoples’ attention quite as effectively as death and there’s been a lot of it on U.S. highways lately. Preliminary figures released this week by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) reveal that for the first nine months of 2015 traffic fatalities increased 9.3%. . .

“NHTSA’s current policies and procedures enable too much bargaining, delay and backsliding and car companies have not been cooperative. . .

“It may be time for NHTSA to step up its data reporting requirements, thereby giving car makers an excuse for gathering more data while setting the stage for improved processes for mitigating the 100-fatalities-a-day carnage on U.S. roads. Sharing a little data seems like a small price to pay to solve a big problem.

“Increased and improved data sharing, aggregation and analysis is sweeping the car industry.  It’s time for NHTSA to get in on the action – in the interest of saving lives.”

Read more here:

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/death-big-data-roger-c-lanctot?trk=prof-post

Vision Zero Petition Book Cover

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/417/742/234/save-lives-not-dollars-urge-dot-to-adopt-vision-zero-policy/

Public Comments on NHTSA Rulemaking for Rear Underride Guards Ends February 16

Truck Safety,

Remember to get your comments into NHTSA by February 16:  http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0001

This Proposed Rule document was issued by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA)

For related information, Open Docket Folder

Action
Notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM).

Summary
This NPRM proposes to upgrade the Federal motor vehicle safety standards that address rear underride protection in crashes into trailers and semitrailers. NHTSA is proposing to adopt requirements of Transport Canada’s standard for underride guards, which require rear impact guards to provide sufficient strength and energy absorption to protect occupants of compact and subcompact passenger cars impacting the rear of trailers at 56 kilometers per hour (km/h) (35 miles per hour (mph)). NHTSA is issuing this NPRM in response to a petition for rulemaking from the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS), and from Ms. Marianne Karth and the Truck Safety Coalition (TSC). This is the second of two documents issued in response to the Karth/TSC petition. Earlier, NHTSA published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking requesting comment on strategies pertaining to underride protection afforded by single unit trucks.

Dates
You should submit your comments early enough to ensure that the docket receives them not later than February 16, 2016.

Trip North May 2015 154

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

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

Thanks to the wonders of modern technology, I was able to watch a live-stream press conference yesterday from the comfort of my home. As a result, I was enlightened about the STATE OF SAFETY in our country. We are acting like the individually-united states are just that–individual. Acting like they need to have control over decisions about what SAFETY measures should be required in their individual states.

In disregard of the abundantly-available wonders of modern safety technology, what we are really doing is increasing the likelihood that INDIVIDUALS in their states will experience DEATH BY MOTOR VEHICLE!

Advocates for Highway & Auto Safety held a press conference yesterday at which they released their 13th annual 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.

I was alerted to the upcoming event by Lou Lombardo of Care for Crash Victims. He sent out this notice:

Report to be released tomorrow from Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety titled “Missing”.

Missing refers to State Safety Laws missing in each State.

Buried in the State summaries are statistics on the number of people who died of crash injuries in each State for the past 10 years. Add them up and we find that 362,532 Americans are “missing” i.e., lost their lives due to vehicle violence over the 10 year period.

Using NHTSA figures of estimated injuries nearly 1.5 million additional people suffered serious injuries in America over the 10 year period. These people are also “missing” – i.e., not counted.

Using DOT values of $9 million in comprehensive costs per fatality, America “missing” losses would be valued by DOT to be about $3 trillion.

http://saferoads.org/roadmaps/

Why would we think that proven safety measures should be left up to the individual states to determine whether or not to require their use? Is this a matter of personal freedom? Do we think that we are trampling on citizens’ individual rights? Do we think that we need to give them CHOICE in this matter?

Do we need to let individuals become informed and make their own decisions on what would or would not be a good idea for them? Would their choice impact only them and them alone? Is that really what we think and how we choose to govern our country?

Is it the duty of the federal government to protect its citizens from crash deaths & serious injuries? I happen to think so: https://annaleahmary.com/2016/01/is-it-the-duty-of-the-federal-government-to-protect-its-citizens-from-crash-deaths-serious-injuries/.

And if that is, in fact, the case, then why not establish national safety standards and require them to be adopted by states? I know, from the aftermath of our crash, that there are already certain federal highway safety standards which states are required to adopt as is.

For an example of this, see FMCSA’s COMPATIBILITY OF STATE LAWS AND REGULATIONS AFFECTING INTERSTATE MOTOR CARRIER OPERATIONS  https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/part/355.

Why not do the same for all of those 319 proven SAFETY LAWS alluded to by Advocates for Highway & Auto Safety? Mandate that all states adopt them as well. Why have each state struggle to re-invent the wheel and wade through all of the research (or try to do the research themselves) when we could gather all of the resources needed to design SAFETY Laws at the national level?

See how we are doing that kind of collaborative effort to obtain the best possible truck underride protection:

To not do so is to cause untold delays in bringing about SAFER travel on our roads. In my estimation, to continue to travel down this road of Individual State Safety Laws, is to knowingly sentence to DEATH BY MOTOR VEHICLE countless members of our families and communities today and in all the days to come.  That is plain and simple criminal negligence.

Reckless Driving & Criminal Injustice: One More Grief For Victims to Bear

And, on top of what I have already said, I would like to add that once safety measures are mandated, then I think that there should be criminal penalties for not adhering to those laws. There should be fines for violation of traffic safety laws. And, if breaking those laws leads to death or serious injury, then the lawbreaker should be held accountable, charged with RECKLESS criminal action, and receive appropriate consequences.

I am no legal expert and cannot begin to delineate exactly how it should be  handled. But when I looked up the word reckless, I found reference to the term reckless endangerment , which has been described like this:

In Tennessee, a person may be convicted of the crime of Reckless Endangerment if the state prosecutor proves beyond a reasonable doubt that the person:

  1. Recklessly engaged in conduct;
  2. That placed or may have placed a person;
  3. In imminent danger of death;
  4. Or serious bodily injury.

The term reckless, as it is used here, means that a person was aware of, but consciously disregarded, a substantial and unjustifiable risk that his conduct would place another person in imminent danger of death or serious bodily injury. 

http://www.tndui.com/criminal-defense/knoxville-felony-offense-lawyer/knoxville-reckless-endangerment-lawyer/

Just yesterday, I saw an example of car owners choosing to not use a safety measure–lane departure warning devices, which apparently can be quite annoying (a glitch which could quite probably be remedied). If use of this safety technology becomes mandated, then those who choose to disregard the law should be charged with any resulting DEATH BY MOTOR VEHICLE.

And, while we are at it, let’s inform and train our citizens from an early age that a vehicle is not a toy and that their driving behavior impacts those around them big time:  https://www.facebook.com/EndDistractedDrving/photos/a.316429631751037.73716.141583792568956/994168863977107/?type=3&fref=nf. We should take a clue from a Jimmy Stewart-narrated 1954 driver safety film:

This, of course, brings up the need to have automakers provide safety devices as standard not optional equipment–at an affordable price for all. And for older vehicles, offer discounts for retrofitting them where possible:

Why am I being so vocal about this issue? Because I do not want thousands upon thousands of family members to receive death certificates in the mail for loved ones whose deaths could have been prevented by this country acting in a timely and morally responsible manner.

certificates and pens 010

This issue of mandating national traffic safety standards to be adopted by states adds one more practical application to my recommendations for a National Vision Zero Goal and Vision Zero Executive Order.

Check out the details of our Vision Zero Petitions here: https://annaleahmary.com/2016/01/adopt-a-national-vision-zero-goal-save-lives-not-dollars/

Maybe I need to get going and launch a new petition calling for federal safety laws to be adopted by all states–including proven means for moving Towards Zero Crash Deaths & Serious Injuries and in a timely manner.  https://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/regulations/title49/section/350.107 & http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/after-deadly-traffic-year-austin-to-join-national-/nqCgq/

To do so would be honoring the memory of not only our daughters, AnnaLeah (forever 17) and Mary (13) who died due to a potentially-preventable truck underride crash, but also my ancestor, Resolved Waldron, who came to New Amsterdam in 1654, established a home on Broadway near Wall Street http://tinyurl.com/hlpu2mx, and “His conscientious exactness in performing his duties [as deputy sheriff] made him a favorite with Governor Stuyvesant.”  http://www.eroots.net/docs/Waldron%20public.pdf May we always be a nation diligent to protect our citizens.

Investigative Report: NHTSA aims to strengthen safety devices that have failed in deadly crashes

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, ,

WSMV Channel 4

Jeremy Finley, Investigative Reporter from Nashville, Tennessee, sheds light on the problem with NHTSA’s proposed rule for underride guards on tractor-trailers. He discusses our crash.

Posted: Jan 21, 2016 6:32 PM EST

Read about it here:

http://www.wsmv.com/story/31026756/nthsa-aims-to-strengthen-safety-devices-that-have-failed-in-deadly-crashes

IMG_4465

One month left to make Public Comments on the Rear Underride Proposed Rule–last day 2/16/16

Truck Safety, ,

For those planning on making a Public Comment on the proposed rule for rear underride protection on tractor-trailers, please make plans to do so before the deadline of February 16, 2016.

Make your comments here: http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=NHTSA-2015-0118-0001

Trip North May 2015 046

Adopt a National Vision Zero Goal: Save lives not dollars!

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

On January 1, 2016, we launched an online petition at Change.org–Adopt National Vision Zero Goal: Save lives not dollars!

Sign & share our new Vision Zero Petition: https://www.change.org/p/obama-adopt-a-vision-zero-goal-and-sign-an-executive-order-to-save-lives-not-dollars

During the fall of 2015, we collected over 15,000 signatures on a petition aimed at Secretary Foxx to apply Vision Zero principles to highway safety rulemaking. http://www.thepetitionsite.com/417/742/234/save-lives-not-dollars-urge-dot-to-adopt-vision-zero-policy/

But in order for DOT to act accordingly, they need to be empowered by a National Vision Zero mandate. That is why we are asking President Obama to set a national Vision Zero goal and to sign a Vision Zero Executive Order.

Help us send the message to Washington, DC, that we want to reduce the almost 33,000 crash deaths which occur each year.  This is the petition letter which will be delivered to President Obama: Vision Zero Executive Order Petition Letter to President Obama

This is the executive order which I have drafted (which, of course, is merely my request/ recommendation):  Executive Order Draft Application of Vision Zero Principles to Highway Safety Regulatory Review

Due to a shared interest in reducing preventable traffic fatalities and serious injuries, we are working with the following individuals & organizations to raise awareness and garner widespread support for this VISION ZERO effort (to be updated as more supporters get on  board with us): Letter of Support for Vision Zero Executive Order Petition

Rebekah photo of crash

Read more about Vision Zero: https://annaleahmary.com/tag/vision-zero/

An example of the application of VZ principles to rulemaking: Underride Guards–Apply Vision Zero principles by requiring crash test-based performance standards for truck underride guards rather than force-based design standards along with success at higher speeds—to include rear (both centered and offset) and side guards for both Single Unit Trucks and trailers.  https://annaleahmary.com/2015/12/a-moms-knee-jerk-reaction-to-nhtsas-proposed-rule-to-improve-rear-underride-protection/

Give $1 for IIHS crash tests on 5/5/16–3 yrs & 1 day after our deadly UNDERRIDE crash

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, , ,

UPDATE 1 year later, December 29, 2016: We are again raising money for crash testing. Crash Test of Innovative Large Truck Side Guard Could Advance Side Underride Prevention Donate here: https://www.fortrucksafety.com/

It will happen:

  • Cars will continue to collide with larger trucks and ride under them when the too-weak underride guard buckles (or because there is no underride protection on the side of the truck)– with deadly consequences.
  • NHTSA will propose truck underride rules which are weaker than could be possible.
  • The trucking industry, for the most part, will wait to find out what new standards might be required of them for underride protection systems in 3 years or more.
  • The Insurance Institute for Highway Safety (IIHS) will sponsor an Underride Roundtable at their Vehicle Research Center in Ruckersville, Virginia, on May 5, 2016.

What we hope will happen is that:

  • Cars will, in the near future, be better protected from deadly underride when they unfortunately & inevitably collide with larger trucks due to human error and road conditions because. . .
  • NHTSA will propose stronger underride rules which provide the best possible protection for travelers on the road because clear evidence will be available (from underride research & crash tests) for all to see that collisions with trucks should be more survivable than previously thought.
  • The trucking industry will take responsibility and voluntarily work to provide better underride protection for collisions with smaller passenger vehicles–without even waiting for improved federal requirements to go into effect.
  • The Underride Roundtable at IIHS, on May 5, 2016, will bring together experts in many fields who will propose solutions, which will contribute greatly toward realizing a vision of Zero Deaths and Zero Serious Injuries from truck underride crashes.

Be a part of this vision. Contribute to support underride research and crash tests.

Update, April 22, 2016: At this point, any donations given will not be for the crash test taking place at the Roundtable on May 5, but would be used for future research/testing.

You can do so here & now: https://www.fortrucksafety.com/

2

Tell others about it. (See sharing icons below.)

For too long, this problem has been recognized but swept under a rug. It has not been considered a priority and money has not been earmarked to resolve the problem. If we don’t do something about it, who will?!

Watch the informative video below which I discovered yesterday from a 2012 investigative report on underride crashes:

 

And, out of the mouths of babes. . .

Up for debate: Could & should the proposed UNDERRIDE rule be made stronger?

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, ,

Stephen Hadley from the Underride Network (http://www.underridenetwork.org/) indicated to me recently his opinion that,

“We need to get media on board that guards must exceed Canadian Standard which only legalizes within two years of implementation 98 % of guards already on the road, this is our best bet to force NHTSA to re-evaluate.”

I have already made this very clear in four media interviews (and two posts) which I had after the proposed rear underride trailer rule was announced:

I’m hoping that the rulemaking process will truly end in the Best Possible Protection.  Somebody’s future is counting on it.

2

Senior Underride Design Project Mid-Year Report Presented by Virginia Tech Students

AnnaLeah and Mary, Truck Safety, ,

The coordinator, Jared Bryson, for the Virginia Tech Senior Underride Design Team sent their end of semester report on the underride project to me yesterday.

I have not had time to read it fully yet (rather busy this weekend). But I did look it over quickly and am intrigued by their emphasis on a Wrap Around Bumper concept.

You can read their report here: Virginia Tech Senior Student Underride Design Project December 2015 Report

They are off for Christmas break. But rumor has it that NHTSA’s proposed underride rule for trailers is assigned reading before they come back after the holidays so that they can submit a Public Comment as a team.

“The student’s final fall presentation is tonight.  I will forward the NPRM tomorrow, for reading over the break. We will discuss in length in January, and formulate a group or individual submissions.”

Good work, team. Looking forward to more good news. . .

Underride Research Memegertie 3271