Tag Archives: underride

Road to Zero Coalition Released a Truck Underride Priority Statement

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, , ,

We were excited to receive news on June 26 that the Road to Zero Coalition (RTZ) has published a Truck Underride Priority Statement on their website.

The Road to Zero Coalition is working to end preventable deaths on U.S. roadways by 2050. With that goal in mind, the Coalition is developing Safety Priority Statements that most – if not all – Coalition members can support.

The National Safety Council leads the Road to Zero initiative in partnership with the U.S. Department of Transportation – specifically the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, the Federal Highway Administration and the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration.

A Sign-On form is now available here, so that RTZ Coalition member organizations can add their name. Coalition members (over 675 as of this date) are listed here:   RTZ Coalition Members

As of June 26, 2018, the following organizations have already signed on in support of the Truck Underride Priority Statement:

We are thankful to the RTZ Steering Group for taking the time to discuss and approve this important means of providing a stronger voice for the vulnerable victims of truck underride.

Those who wish to add their voice, but are not RTZ Coalition members, can either join RTZ here: Road to Zero Coalition Membership Form

Or, write their own Letter of Support and Sign the STOP Underrides! Petition here: Congress, Act Now To End Deadly Truck Underride!

Ramblings About the State of Underride

Truck Safety, , ,
  1. Award-winning WUSA9 Underride Series
  2. What do Heidi King’s responses tell us about the need for the STOP Underrides! Bill to insist that NHTSA move forward with underride rulemaking? Do we expect that they will do it without the encouragement of a law telling them (and authorizing them) to do so? NHTSA’s Heidi King Responds to Senator Nelson’s Questions For The Record on Truck Underride
  3. Perhaps 700-1002 people may have died from underride since the bill was introduced on December 12, 2017, until this day: Every Month Passing of the STOP Underrides! Bill Is Delayed Means More Unnecessary, Preventable Deaths
  4. Underride report language is in the Appropriations Bill:  FY18 omnibus report language,  Truck underride safety research—The Committee notes that NHTSA’s proposed rulemaking in December 2015 to update truck rear impact guard requirements cited 362 annual fatalities associated with light vehicle crashes into the rear of trucks. The Committee encourages NHTSA to move forward with this rulemaking and continue working with relevant experts and stakeholders, including researchers, engineers, and safety advocates, and the trucking industry, to facilitate the deployment and adoption of rear and side underride protection devices.
  5. Front Underride Protection (FUP) is not talked about as much, yet many people die from lack of protection there as well: https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=56&v=iNRpiRmlBEc and https://www.youtube.com/watch?time_continue=1&v=SXZnHq1PUPU
  6. Retrofitting is included in the Bill because there are millions of existing trailers on the road which will still be death traps otherwise. See IIHS video if you don’t believe me. After watching it, ask yourself if you would want to collide with one of the trucks on the road which was not retrofitted with effective and comprehensive (all around the truck) underride protection: https://www.facebook.com/iihs.org/videos/412706855872750/
  7. To continue that theme of To Retrofit OR Not. . . in February 2018, a man died when his car lodged under the rear of a 2005 Great Dane trailer (one of the older weak rear guards). Our car lodged under the back of a 2007 Great Dane trailer (one of the older weak rear guards). How long do you suppose that we will continue to have those older (more dangerous) trucks on the road? Jessup man dead after slamming car into tractor-trailer on Beltway
  8. President Carter made a point of saying that safety should not be a part of Trucking Deregulation:  Trucking Industry Deregulation Message to the Congress Transmitting Proposed Legislation. 
    June 21, 1979, To the Congress of the United States:I am today transmitting to the Congress legislation to reduce substantially Federal economic regulation over the trucking industry.The trucking industry today is subject to perhaps more complex, detailed, and burdensome Federal regulation than any other industry in our Nation. . . 

    SAFETY

    Reforms in safety enforcement are necessary because present levels of safety are unsatisfactory, and because authority to monitor safety practices and to sanction safety violations should be strengthened. These provisions are distinct from the economic reforms and are not made necessary by them.

    The bill I propose places new emphasis on the existing fitness test which guarantees that all new entrants into the industry are safe. It also consolidates the safety authority in the Department of Transportation, and gives the Secretary of Transportation broader and more effective authority to deal with safety violations. . .

    So I don’t want to hear anybody whine, “Oh, no, not another regulation!” This is a matter of protecting public health and safety — not restricting the freedoms of the trucking industry! If market forces were going to solve the problem, they would have done so decades ago. We apparently need a law to protect us.

With Hope, We Carry On: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kp7acA3CI34

Video & PowerPoint Slides Posted by IIHS for the Second Underride Roundtable

Truck Safety, , ,
IIHS has posted video and PowerPoint Presentations from the Second Underride Roundtable on August 29, 2017.
 
 
Afternoon Session, Part 1/Side Guard Panel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=31VhLbAYlyw
 

Afternoon Session, Part 1/Industry Panel & Crash Avoidance Panel: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mFyf—dZV4

Every Month Passing of the STOP Underrides! Bill Is Delayed Means More Unnecessary, Preventable Deaths

Truck Safety,

It’s a mathematical reality. The STOP Underrides! Bill was introduced in the Senate and the House on December 12, 2017. If it had been voted on and passed [even as quickly as in one month like the TREAD Act was in October 2000 in response to deaths from Firestone tires on the Ford Explorer], then the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration would already be moving ahead with the process of issuing a comprehensive underride protection rule.

But it has not been brought to a vote. Reportedly, Republican Congressional Offices, and the Committees to which the Bill was referred, are waiting to hear the results of the Governmental Accountability Underride Report (GAO) — predicted to be completed by the end of January 2019.

I’m not sure exactly what people expect to learn from that report which we have not already discovered and of which we have made them fully aware — including the IIHS research, the undercounting of underrides (through studies and through errors in how our own crashes are listed in FARS reports), industry and government awareness of the problem for decades (e.g., stated intention on March 19, 1969, of adding side underride protection), ATA prediction of underride regulations 16 years ago, and NTSB underride recommendations, for starters.

No doubt about it, blood continues to be spilled on the roadways while we twiddle our thumbs. How many people do you suppose will die from Death By Underride because of this totally unwarranted delay? Possibly 700 – 2,338. Are these lives not worth saving?

Underride Deaths Not Prevented During Delay

In Passing the STOP Underrides! Bill

(These numbers do not include injuries caused by underride.)

Months of Delay in Passing the Bill To Date

Deaths/month (if using the FARS data minimum of reported underride deaths)

600/yr. & 50/mo.

Deaths/mo. (27%)

1500/yr. & 125/mo.

Deaths/mo. (50% of total truck/car crash fatalities) 2,000/yr & 167/mo.

January 2018

50

125

167

February 2018

50

125

167

March 2018

50

125

167

April 2018

50

125

167

May 2018

50

125

167

June 2018

50

125

167

Total Already Dead Since the Introduction of the Bill on 12/12/2017

300

750

1002

July 2018

50

125

167

August 2018

50

125

167

September 2018

50

125

167

October 2018

50

125

167

November 2018

50

125

167

December 2018

50

125

167

January 2019

50

125

167

February 2019

50

125

167

March 2019

50

125

167

Additional Underride Deaths While Waiting for the GAO Report to be finished before making a decision about voting on the bill

400

1000

1336

TOTAL since bill was introduced through March 2019

700

1750

2338

Underride Deaths Not Prevented During Delay

Whom do you suppose we should hold responsible for those deaths? Or to put it in another way, who will be Bold Guardians — rather than Hesitant Bystanders  — and insist that this bill is long-overdue and needs to be given high priority to vote upon and pass into law?

No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend’s or of thine own were: any man’s death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bells tolls; it tolls for thee.  John Donne

What’s the intent of Early Warning Reporting & what’s it done to end underride?

Truck Safety, , , ,

I sent this email out to people at NHTSA and Congressional Offices on Monday morning, June 12:

Last week, I re-read an interesting book by Michael Lemov called Car Safety Wars. One thing that caught my interest was an account of the 2000 TREAD Act in which an Early Warning Report (EWR) system was mandated by Congress.

The thought of NHTSA requiring manufacturers of motor vehicles and motor vehicle equipment to report when fatalities occur involving their products is intriguing. It makes me wonder if Commercial Motor Vehicles are included in this mandate. Does anyone know the answer to this question?
If they aren’t, how can we make sure that they are? What would have to be done to accomplish this? A mandate by Congress? Some kind of an amendment to a rule by DOT? A petition requesting them to do so?

Wouldn’t it help to improve data collection on underride tragedies if manufacturers themselves were required to report to NHTSA when fatalities occurred in collisions involving their commercial motor vehicle products — especially if it specified what was the cause of death (and not simply what caused the crash)? Wouldn’t this give valuable information to manufacturers on the need to re-evaluate the safety and efficacy of their products?

Then I went back online to dig further into this situation. This is what I discovered:

I found that Commercial Motor Vehicles are included in the TREAD Act. Therefore, I would like to know:

  1. How this information is used currently
  2. How we could better use it
  3. What could be done to make it more useful

The Transportation Recall Enhancement, Accountability and Documentation (TREAD) Act was enacted in the fall of 2000. Its intention is to increase consumer safety through mandates assigned to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA).

Two major components of the TREAD Act are 1) the requirement of manufacturers to report to NHTSA when they conduct a safety recall or other safety-related campaign, and 2) the need to report information related to defects, especially in cases of injury or death related to the use of products (also referred to as “early warning reporting”(EWR)).

There are many definitions, exceptions and interpretations found in the final rule for this regulation. Requirements for manufacturers may differ depending on what type and how much of a product they produce in a calendar year. The following is a breakdown of what may be required of a trailer manufacturer.

All manufacturers must submit quarterly reports with regard to any incident involving a death. So again, no matter the number of products your company makes, if there is a death alleged due to a failure of or during use of the product, it must be reported. 

If you are a manufacturer of 5,000 or more trailers annually, you must also submit quarterly reports with regard to the following categories:
1. Production information
2. Death and injury claims
3. Property damage
4. Consumer complaints
5. Warranty claims
6. Field reports
I then asked NHTSA to generate a report for me and this is what I received:

I will have to check to find out if the report is actually what I was anticipating but, as far as I can tell, this report does not include data on the thousands of truck/car crash fatalities which occur each year (on average about 4,000). Where are rest of those people?

Bottomline: The information is not being collected and reported and responded to in the manner which was the intent of the law (The TREAD Act of 2000). That, in my mind, is a problem. Had the manufacturers and NHTSA done what was required, quite possibly our daughters and thousands of others, who were in truck/car crashes after that bill was passed, would not have suffered DEATH BY UNDERRIDE. This Early Warning Reporting (EWR) system should have been able to solve the underride problem and save them.

They shouldn’t be dead.

“Mistakes happen on the road. The goal is to make sure that those don’t result in serious injury or death.”

Truck Safety, , ,

The most recent underride which I have heard about involved a car driver, in Wisconsin, who ran a stop sign and consequently collided with the side of a tractor-trailer resulting in underride. There is speculation that alcohol might be a factor.

Man transported to hospital by MedFlight after crashing into semitruck, sheriff says

Unfortunately, this is exactly the kind of crash circumstance which undoubtedly has contributed to attitudes which blame the victim and neglect the underlying dangerous geometric mismatch between passenger vehicles and larger commercial motor vehicles. The result is that we have lost the opportunity to save lives by making truck crashes more survivable.

I have described this attitude along with other possible reasons why the underride problem has not been adequately addressed: A DIFFERENT STRATEGY To Achieve Underride Protection

“Mistakes happen on the road. The goal is to make sure that those mistakes don’t result in serious injury or death.” That’s what Eric Flack said he was told by the IIHS in one of the segments of his truck underride series.

Award-Winning Truck Underride Full-Length Documentary Is Impressive, But The Best Is Yet To Come

Truck Safety, , ,

Eric Flack and his team at WUSA 9, over the course of this last year, investigated the truck underride problem and attempts to get it solved once and for all. They even won a prestigious Edward A. Murrow journalism award for their hard work in looking into this complex and multi-layered traffic safety/public health issue.

Now all the separate episodes of their series are put together in this impressive full-length documentary of the underride tragedy:

WUSA 9 continues to cover our efforts to bring about a comprehensive underride protection mandate which will ensure that — one day — all trucks on the road will be much safer to travel around. I look forward to them adding a final episode to their underride story because I know that the best is yet to come.

Thank you, Erin Spaht & Eric Flack!

$ gain motivates engineers to end underride tragedies? Nothing further from truth.

Truck Safety

Two separate comments which I read today implied that some are inferring that the hope of turning a profit is what primarily motivates engineers to develop solutions to end underride tragedies. Nothing is further from the truth.

The fact of the matter is that most of those, who stick out their necks to go against the stream of opposition to implementing underride solutions, are doing so on their own time and out of their own pocket because they have seen the devastation of underride crashes over and over and have decided to try and do something about this travesty!

The truth is that those, who oppose progress in this means of preventing motor vehicle fatalities, might be the ones more likely motivated by financial gain. Just sayin’ . . .

Wrong-headed thinking of industry leaders

Of course, I have to add here that the regulated-industry reaction is only to be expected because they are organizations whose duty it is to protect their bottomline — despite being composed of individuals who, on their own and following their own consciences, might react differently.

So, who should we let determine the fate of vulnerable travelers of our roads?

Four Separate School Bus Underride Crashes in the Last Six Months

Safety Advocacy, ,
I have become aware of four SCHOOL BUS underride crashes since November:
 
 
 
Hmmm, I detect a pattern here.

NHTSA’s Heidi King Responds to Senator Nelson’s Questions For The Record on Truck Underride

Truck Safety, , , ,

Senator Nelson submitted Questions for the Record to NHTSA Deputy Administrator Heidi King following her nomination hearing by the Senate Commerce Committee for the role of NHTSA Administrator. We received her answers yesterday:

Senator Nelson’s QUESTION: The National Transportation Safety Board has made several recommendations regarding underride guards that have not been completed. Every year, lives are tragically lost in truck crash accidents because trucks don’t have side underride guards that prevent cars from going under the side of a truck. Further improvements to rear underride guards could also prevent cars from going underneath the back of a truck. Several families in Florida have experienced this tragedy because the life-saving technology is not in place.

Do you believe it is time to require trucks to have underride guards so no more precious lives are lost in such tragic accidents?

Heidi King’s RESPONSE: The agency seeks to take an approach to reducing crashes involving passenger cars impacting the side and rear of commercial motor vehicles taking into account all available technologies. I am committed to a data driven approach to reducing these risks, including an examination of all options. This includes an examination of crash avoidance technologies, such as automatic emergency braking (AEB) and forward collision warning, to mitigate the severity of these crashes and to prevent them from occurring. NHTSA’s research indicates that these technologies on light vehicles have the potential of reducing underride frequency and severity.

Improvements to underride guard standards will be evaluated along with the expected changes to the vehicle crash environment.

My Reaction: Crash avoidance technologies might reduce the number of crashes which occur between trucks and cars. But when collisions do occur — because collision avoidance technology cannot prevent every crash — underride will still occur if there is not effective underride protection on the part of the truck where the collision takes place.

If we decide to use an Either/Or strategy and pick Crash Avoidance technologies instead of Underride Protective Devices, should we also stop using Air Bags and Seat Belts because we no longer expect to have crashes occur?

Why would we not use a Both/And approach to protecting the vulnerable motoring public (including pedestrians, cyclists, and motorcyclists, as well as passenger vehicles)?

Senator Nelson’s QUESTION: What is your plan to require improvements to rear underride guards and the addition of side underride guards on commercial motor vehicles? When will DOT implement NTSB’s recommendations? Please provide specific timelines.

Heidi King’s RESPONSE: On December 16, 2015, NHTSA issued a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) for upgrading rear impact guards on trailers and semi-trailers. NHTSA is reviewing these comments and developing next steps.

NHTSA issued an ANPRM for improved rear truck underride guards and conspicuity tape on single unit trucks. NHTSA estimates that rear guards are not cost effective for single unit trucks. NHTSA is considering next steps regarding rear impact guards and retroreflective tape for single unit trucks.

Regarding crash avoidance measures to reduce underride, per an agreement reached with
automakers in 2016, AEB will be offered as a standard feature in virtually all new light vehicles by September 2022.

My Reaction: What does that mean: “developing next steps” and “considering next steps”? NHTSA has already received numerous recommendations in the Public Comments to underride rulemaking. They have not responded to those in a timely fashion, and they are not being transparent about what they plan to do and when.

In addition, we have submitted a petition for them to follow up the December 2015 Rear Upgrade NPRM with a Supplemental Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (SNPRM) which would encompass everything outlined in the STOP Underrides! Bill (as well as the NTSB underride safety recommendations). In other words, a clear path (based on the recommendations of engineers) has been laid out for them. Additionally, the Bill calls for a multidisciplinary Committee On Underride Protection to be established to guide them in the process of moving forward.

Regarding the cost benefit analysis on single unit trucks, they have not revealed the formula for their calculations, which are most certainly based on flawed data and inaccurate assumptions.

Heidi King’s response refers to the AEB on “virtually” all new light vehicles. What about the older portion of the fleet which will not yet have AEB by 2022? What about AEB on trucks? Justin Stolzfus wrote about that concern:

Although an agreement among federal safety regulators, the insurance industry and automakers will put lifesaving automatic braking systems on most light vehicles by 2022, it will be many more years before large trucks and commercial vehicles, responsible for 4,000 deaths annually, get the same technology. Automatic Braking In Trucks Will Lag Cars By Years

Senator Nelson’s QUESTION: Some trailer manufacturers currently have retrofit kits available to strengthen existing trailers to enable them to meet the Institute for Highway Safety’s ToughGuard standard. Given the availability of current technology to address this challenge, what steps can the agency now take to prevent passenger compartment intrusion and underride fatalities?

Heidi King’s RESPONSE: NHTSA continues to monitor the development of this technology and will work with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) to ensure that truck and fleet operators are aware of safety considerations for trailer repairs. FMCSA operates roadside inspection programs for commercial motor vehicles and underride guards are inspected as part of these programs.

My Reaction: However, underride guards are often not properly maintained and are not currently on Vehicle Inspection Checklists and are not included in the Appendix G in the FMCSA Safety Regulations Pocketbook. It seems to me that, until they are included, underride guards are not likely to be consistently inspected or receive appropriate violations  — including an Out of Service Violation for a weak or non-existent guard, which could lead to a crash becoming deadly.

Sitting around and monitoring the development of technology seems to me to be irresponsible when the agency could take the lead and mandate that the technology — which is already developed — be installed. Any adjustments which would be required could easily be handled by the industry in the time period before implementation is required. This would save lives; people die when colliding with existing trucks not just newly-manufactured ones.

After all, the industry has had plenty of time to prepare. DOT stated in 1969 that they planned on adding underride protection to the sides of large vehicles. And the industry themselves, in 2002, predicted that there would be underride regulations for front, side and single unit trucks by 2006.

There is no excuse for the blatant inaction which is evident all-around.

Senator Nelson’s QUESTION: When will NHTSA release the results of the Texas A&M side underride study, which was completed at the end of 2017?

Heidi King’s RESPONSE: The report has been released and is available here.

My Reaction: In 1969, DOT planned on adding side guards to trucks after technical studies had been completed. Well, they’ve been completed. We’ve been waiting almost 50 years. Will they act now? (Read more of my reaction here.)

Heidi King holds a significant position in NHTSA — an agency charged with ensuring the Safety of the traveling public. I, for one, am not very satisfied with her answers. Did she explain why the agency has waited so long to effectively solve the underride problem — especially when engineering solutions are available? Did she let us know when they would move forward?

It seems clear to me that her answers confirm the fact that, if Congress wants the Department of Transportation to address the underride problem and end preventable underride deaths & injuries, then they will need to pass a law telling them to do so.

Side Underride Crashes Kill 200 People a Year. Will Congress Act?