Tag Archives: underride

Road Users Should Have the Right to Life: STOP Underrides!

Truck Safety, ,

I don’t know the exact fatality rate for people who experience Passenger Compartment Intrusion (PCI) when their passenger vehicle collides with a truck. But I imagine that it is close to 100%. After all, PCI means that the truck comes into your survival space. When a truck hits your body, what do you think is going to happen? You don’t stand a chance of survival, that’s what!

So, if there is technology which can prevent PCI, don’t you think that we should put it on large trucks? Don’t you think that road users should have the right to life?

STOP Underrides!

 

My knee-jerk reaction to the ATA Letter of Opposition to the STOP Underrides! Bill

Truck Safety, , , ,

The American Trucking Associations (ATA) sent a letter, on June 4, 2018, to the sponsors of the STOP Underrides! Bill — including Senator Gillibrand — listing the reasons that they are opposing this life-preserving legislation.

ATA letter to Commerce TI on Safety and the STOP Underrides Act FINAL 6.1.18

Here is my knee-jerk reaction written as soon as I read the ATA’s letter. If there is a more official response, I will update this post.

    1. What % of the industry annual revenue and profit is the $10 billion Safety Spending?
    2. What is the industry annual revenue and profit for the same time period?
    3. ATA states that, “Without question, these investments are paying dividends in highway safety. Over the past decade, the number of truck-related fatalities has decreased by 11 percent despite steady growth in the overall number of trucks and truck-miles traveled” RESPONSE:  NHTSA: Large truck crash fatalities increased in 2016 According to data released by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), 4,317 fatalities occurring last year in crashes involving large trucks, which is 5.4% higher when compared to 2015 and is also the highest level of large truck crash deaths since 2007. http://www.trucker.com/safety/nhtsa-large-truck-crash-fatalities-increased-2016
    4. ATA states that: “significantly increased likelihood of high-centering of the side guards on steep changes in highway and street levels, such as elevated railroad crossings, and at warehouse docking wells. High-centering incidents already occur when operators of low frame trailers misjudge clearance heights at railroad crossings, which can result in tractor-trailers becoming stranded on railroad tracks. If all trailers were to have substantial side underride guards extended beneath the trailer sides, high-centering incidents would likely become more frequent.” Response: In fact, that is not a true statement. The engineers who have worked on trying to solve the side underride problem are ENGINEERS; they think about every aspect of the problem. They listen to truck drivers and motor carriers. Here is a reaction to that concern from Perry Ponder, an engineer for a small trailer manufacturer and designer of the AngelWing side guard: A 2002 Study by the University of West Virginia showed that trailers and trucks must be much lower to the ground than an underride guard to hang up on regulation railroad crossings and driveway and dock slopes.  One need look no further than how low semi-tractors are to the ground, or low-boy trailers. or car hauling trailers, to dispel the notion an underride guard at 16 to 18 inches from the ground cannot operate safely over the road.    Development of Design Vehicles for Hang-Up Problem (https://trrjournalonline.trb.org/doi/abs/10.3141/1847-02) , 2002 “Design vehicles were developed to evaluate the operation of low-ground-clearance, long-wheelbase, overhang vehicles on extreme hump or sag profile alignments. The literature review indicated that although formal studies had been conducted to develop design vehicles, these vehicles did not include the information needed to assess hang-up susceptibility on a particular vertical alignment. Relevant design vehicle dimensions for 17 vehicle types prone to hang-up were developed.  Relevant dimensions included wheelbase, ground clearance, and front and rear overhang. These vehicles can be used in conjunction with the HANGUP software or other tools in designing vertical alignments that reduce the likelihood of hangup problems. Because they are based on representative samples of both field-collected and manufacturers’ data and have been evaluated using the HANGUP software, the design vehicles are reasonable and have a rational basis. The proposed vehicles should receive broad review with an eye toward inclusion in appropriate design policies and guidelines.”
    5. ATA states that, “ the bill is not based on science, data or safety benefit. Moreover, the bill ignores the potential technical issues it raises, as well as the diversity of our industry and other technologies for addressing these and other crashes. In trucking we know unequivocally that one size does not fit all, and that investments in certain technologies that one company makes may not make sense for another. Standards for new and in-service truck equipment should be based on sound economic and engineering principles that enhance safety, take into account real-world operations, and weigh the potential unintended consequences.” Response: Their statement ignores the multitude of research studies (including NHTSA’s own Texas A&M virtual side underride study which was recently completed) and crash tests which have been done by engineers for decades. And, in fact, the ATA — knowing that the underride problem is vastly undercounted — could have been conducting their own research or putting tangible support behind ongoing research when they were predicting underride regulations in 2002. How much money could have been devoted to solving this problem if they had contributed $1 billion every year for 16 years since that time? See this ATA/TMC 2002 paper: A Brief Look at the Far Horizon An Exploration of What’s to Come for Trucking
    6. ATA states: “Recently, twenty automakers representing more than 99 percent of the U.S. auto market committed to make automatic emergency braking a standard feature on virtually all new passenger vehicles by 2022, which will help reduce many of the crashes where a passenger vehicle strikes a truck.” Response: How long before this will be present in 100% of the passenger vehicle fleet? What about weather-related conditions when that technology will not be effective? What about front override? What about side underride?
    7. ATA states: “the Stop Underrides Act would divert a significant amount of both NHTSA and industry resources away from important crash avoidance technologies with wide-ranging benefits in all types of crashes to focus on a narrow type of crash and a specific countermeasure that is unproven in real-world applications.” Response: Please specify exactly which resources will be taken away from crash avoidance technologies. What is now being put toward them? What will be required to be put into underride protection technology?
    8. ATA states:  “Regrettably, the bill is not based on science, data or safety benefit.“ Response: What do they call what the IIHS has done for years if not scientific, data-driven, safety-proven research? Jerry says, “The bill is based upon the NTSB Truck Underride Safety Recommendations to NHTSA in 2014.
      The bill was developed by a team of experts, engineers, manufacturers,  academic both national and international, lawyers, safety advocates and victims. The research by IIHS is scientific data driven and safety benefit research and testing. I recommend a field hearing at IIHS to not only disprove this point but to inform and educate the  House T&I Committee and Senate Commerce Committee on the facts of underride.
      “The courts differ on this as the Dodgen vs PJ Trailers case demonstrated through crash testing that the trailer design was dangerous and added known safety measures would have prevented the fatality in that situation.”
    9. ATA states: “a narrow type of crash and a specific countermeasure that is unproven in real-world applications.” Response: Terry Rivet is a good example of a proven countermeasure. 
       We know for certain that Terry Rivet is alive today because Stoughton trailers voluntarily upgraded the rear guard on their trailers. Mr. Rivet had an accident in snowy weather in New York and collided with a new Stoughton trailer with an improved rear underride guard on March 2,  2017. Tractor trailers need to be safer to prevent underride deaths, Gillibrand says  Maybe we should ask him if we should have waited until 2022 to see if the crash avoidance technology works. On January  3, 2018, there was another traffic pile-up in New York during whiteout conditions with dozens of vehicles involved. The only fatality was from a car rear-ending a tractor trailer with an older, weak rear underride guard — resulting in an underride death. 1 dead, 1 critical from Thruway crash involving dozens of vehicles Unfortunately, we cannot ask that driver how he feels about the idea of waiting until crash avoidance technology is available to end truck underride tragedies.

I Survived Because Of Stoughton.

Here are some other relevant trucking industry communications related to Underride Technology Mandates (with a response from Senator Gillibrand & a blogpost from a truck driver advocate):

It is unfortunate that the regulated industry has such power over how they are regulated. Their decisions and actions are apparently informed by a strong inclination to protect the bottomline rather than by the conscience of individuals within that industry. How frustrating that they do not truly take into account the “honest bottomline” for, if they did, they would know that it would be to their ultimate advantage to make full use of every safety technology available to them.

Here is a FAQ document with answers to frequently asked questions about the STOP Underrides! Bill: FAQ STOP Underrides Bill. I hope that it helps to get us all on the same page and moving more quickly toward effective collaboration to end truck underride tragedies with Win/Win solutions.

After all, this is not about making the truck industry get in line — or else. To quote Rose in The Last Jedi: That’s how we’re gonna win. Not fighting what we hate, saving what we love.

 

 

 

We The People Must Stand Up To Industry Opposition To Lifesaving Underride Protection Technology

Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, ,

We the People must grab the reins of power to protect vulnerable travelers on our roads. The federal government and the trucking industry are either dragging their feet or deliberately opposing* efforts to get life-saving underride protection technology on all large trucks. It’s up to us to change the course of history.

The STOP Underrides! Bill has already been introduced (on December 12, 2017) by Senator Gillibrand, Senator Rubio, Congressman Cohen, and Congressman DeSaulnier. Now it’s time to let every one of our legislators know that it is not just Lois Durso and Marianne Karth who want this bill passed. The people of this country must speak up and demand that this practical solution be required.

Are you with us?

Watch this compelling video:

Over 57,000 people have signed the STOP Underrides! Petition. We need a strong voice calling for an end to these preventable tragedies. If you have not already done so, please sign this petition: Congress, Act Now To End Deadly Truck Underride!

Spread the word! Share the video and the petition.

Please let us know if you would be willing to put a bumper sticker on your car to raise awareness. If so, email us at stopunderrides@gmail.com.

* Letters from Trucking Industry Associations in Opposition to Underride Technology Mandates (with a response from Senator Gillibrand & a blogpost from a truck driver advocate)

It is unfortunate that the regulated industry has such power over how they are regulated. Their decisions and actions are apparently informed by a strong inclination to protect the bottomline rather than by the conscience of individuals within that industry. How frustrating that they do not truly take into account the “honest bottomline” for, if they did, they would know that it would be to their ultimate advantage to make full use of every safety technology available to them.

Here is a FAQ document with answers to frequently asked questions about the STOP Underrides! Bill: FAQ STOP Underrides Bill. I hope that it helps to get us all on the same page and moving more quickly toward effective collaboration to end truck underride tragedies with Win/Win solutions.

After all, this is not about getting the truck industry to get in line — or else. To quote Rose in The Last Jedi: That’s how we’re gonna win. Not fighting what we hate, saving what we love.

Road to Zero Coalition Members Can Sign On Here to the Truck Underride Priority Statement!

How Imp’t Is It To Know Exactly How Many People Die From Underride Before Taking Action To Prevent It?

Truck Safety, ,

We know from experience and reading studies that truck underride is vastly undercounted. But how important is it to know precisely how many people are impacted by this before taking decisive action to end these preventable tragedies?

Because of the requirement to do cost/benefit analysis when doing federal rulemaking, some people refuse to budge until they get more information than we have already provided. Isn’t the spilled blood we are already aware of enough? Especially coupled with the convincing crash testing which proves that the outcome of collisions could be completely changed!

Here’s another study on estimating side underride fatalities:  Estimating Side Underride Fatalities Using Field Data. I was a little hesitant to post it but asked the opinion of Matt Brumbelow, Senior Research Engineer at the IIHS. He says,

While I do have a few concerns with the methodology, the results actually support the conclusion that side underride guards would be greatly beneficial.  Specifically, she found that FARS underestimates the occurrence of side underride: over half (52%) of the cases coded as “no underride” actually did have side underride.  When you include the crashes that are coded as underride in FARS, they find that 61% of all side impact crashes with a tractor-trailer resulted in underride with PCI.  In other words, around 180 fatalities per year (61% of 300) could potentially be prevented with sufficient side underride protection.

While this 61% figure is still smaller than estimates we’ve made, I don’t see how it could lead anyone to think that the benefit of side guards would be small.

For goodness sake, what are we waiting for?!

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

A compelling look at Death By Underride from Cool Breeze Studio

AnnaLeah and Mary, Safety Advocacy, Truck Safety, ,

Lois Durso & I were privileged to meet with Michael Hawkins (Cool Breeze Studio) last week at his studio in South Carolina to begin work on some underride video productions. Mike just finished this short look at Death By Underride.

In memory of Roya, AnnaLeah & Mary and the countless other victims of underride

With the hope that countless other people will be spared a similar fate

Sign the STOP Underrides! Petition here: Congress, Act Now To End Deadly Truck Underride!

STOP Underrides Brochure 2018 3

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.