Divided underride committee to draft recommendations for NHTSA

A divided committee that was created to provide recommendations on how to reduce the number of underride crashes held its final meeting on Wednesday, May 22. Now, the committee members will turn their attention to drafting two reports – one from the majority and another with the opposing perspective.

The Advisory Committee on Underride Protections is tasked with providing the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with its recommendations by June 30. Lee Jackson, the committee’s chairman, plans to draft the majority opinion – which includes suggesting a side underride guard mandate – by June 18. Committee members Jeff Bennett and Doug Smith will then have until June 27 to draft a dissenting opinion that points out operational hurdles and a lopsided cost-benefit analysis that was issued by NHTSA.

Underride crashes most commonly occur when a car slides underneath a tractor-trailer. Regulations already require rear underride guards, but NHTSA is considering the idea of mandating side underride guards.

Divided committee

The very need for two reports illustrates the committee’s division throughout the process.

Congress included a provision to create the underride advisory committee in the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. Once the committee members were selected, it didn’t require a fortune teller to predict that many of the issues could become contentious.

Three of the committee’s original 16 members lost loved ones in underride-related crashes. In addition, several of the members have long lobbied for a side underride guard mandate. Smith, an OOIDA board member, is the only truck driver on the committee.

While truck safety groups advocate for the requirement, a recently published cost-benefit analysis leads to questions of practicality.

Last year, NHTSA issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking that considered requiring side underride guards on tractor-trailers. The preliminary research provided by NHTSA indicated that the annual cost of the mandate would be as much as $1.2 billion while saving fewer than 20 lives each year.

Proponents of the mandate argue that the analysis is flawed and that the number of underride crashes is underreported. Opponents contend that side underride guards are effective only at low speeds and at specific angles. In addition, the guards could lead to unintended consequences and create operational hurdles, such as a trailer getting stuck on railroad tracks.

Final meeting and what’s next

Bennett, who is representing motor vehicle engineers on the committee, delivered a presentation that showed an unsuccessful side underride guard test from April 2023. In the test, the side guard was unable to prevent a Ford Fiesta traveling at 45 mph and at a 45-degree angle from traveling underneath the trailer.

Some members of the committee attended the test, and Bennett was critical of them for not openly disclosing the results in previous meetings.

Aaron Kiefer, a committee member representing motor vehicle crash investigators, later presented successful tests where the car was traveling at under 40 mph.

The committee now must use the information it compiled over six meetings to draft a report to NHTSA. The recommendations will come from votes on numerous motions introduced during the six meetings.

At the April meeting, Kiefer introduced motions to recommend that NHTSA require all new semitrailers and all semitrailers manufactured after 1998 to be equipped with side underride guards. Both motions passed.

Curiously, however, the committee also voted at the April meeting to ask NHTSA to withdraw its advance notice of proposed rulemaking and redo its cost-benefit analysis – which would seemingly slow down any efforts to complete a final rule. LL