I'\SLIRAI\G
l'JSTfT\SI1
FOR
HIQ-IWAY
SAFETY
luI 3,1993
Vol. 28 No.8
SPEED UMITS HIGHER - STIU LOTS OF OUfLAW SPEEDERS
Faced with widespread disregard lor 55
mph speed limits, Congress gave states
the option of raising limits to 65 mph on
their rural interstate highways in 1987.
As Rep. James Hansen of Utah put it at
the time, ~The lact is that '55' is not
obeyed ... [Tlbe speed limit can safely be
increased on our rural interstates. Let's
adjust the speed limit to match reality.~
The Institute was one of many public
health groups pointing out in 1987 that
motorists wouldn't obey 65 mph speed
limits any more than they were obeying
55. ~Most motorists who now drive between 55 and 65 mph will speed up to between 65 and 75,~ Institute President Brian
O'Neill told Congress al the lime.
Within a year of Congress giving its
okay, 38 states had raised speed limits on
rural interstates to 65 mph. Today only
seven states - Connecticut, Hawaii, Mary-
land, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania,
and Rhode Island - retain maximum
speed limits at 55 mph. Delaware and the
District of Columbia don't have any rural
interstates, and Massachusetts has lewer
than 100 miles posted at 65.
Have the predictiOfls of 65 mph proponents come true? Are we abiding by the
higher speed limits as Rep. Hansen and
others predicted we would? Six years later
the evidence is a resounding no.
New Medeo Evldeoce: Seventy-five
percent of all passenger car drivers on
New Mexico's rural interstate highways
are breaking the law and exceeding 65
mph speed limits. This is the principal
finding 01 a continuing Inslilute survey.
New Mexico was the lirst state to raise
speed limits after Congress gave its okay
in 1987, and the Institute has been monitoring speeds there ever since.
Not only are three out of four cars going
laster than 65 but more than one 01 three
is exceeding 70. Aweek after speed limits
were changed, the Institute found that only 5 percent of cars were going faster than
70 mph. The most recent survey, conduct·
ed in April 1993, (ound 36 percent of all
cars going laster than 70 - up from 32 percent last year and the highest percentage
the Institute has ever recorded in April.
Speeding isn't limited to cars. Fifty-two
percent of tractor-trailers go faster than
65 mph, and 13 percent exceed 70.
Since April 1987, the proportion of cars
exceeding 65 is up by 38 percentage points.
The proportion of speeding tractOr.f:railers
has increased 19 percentage points.
On New Mexico's urban interstates,
where speed limits are still 55 mph, 36
percent of cars and 16 percent of tractortrailers go faster than 65 mph. Thirteen
2..flHS Slatus Repon, Val. 28, No.8, July 3, /993
Percentage
80
P8I'cInIaCJI going 1.... 1h8n 65 mph
Going Faster
Than 65 and 70
interstates in
New Mexico
gan monitoring travel speeds in Virginia
eo
MPH on Rural
..
percent of cars and 2 percent of tractortrailers go faster than 70.
Virginia vs. Maryland: Neighboring
states with different posted speed limits
provide a good basis for comparing adherence to speed limit Jaws. The Institute beand Maryland in June 1988, when both
states had maximum 55 mph speed limits.
At that time, 24 percent of cars in Mary-
PASSENGER CARS
land and 32 percent in Virginia were going
faster than 65 mph on rural interstates.
When Virginia raised speed limits lor
cars to 65 mph in July 1988, the number
exceeding 65 - and thus breaking the new
law - jumped to 58 percent. Meantime,
there was no change next door in Maryland
2lI
0
_ _ "" . . . . 1. . . . . . . . . . . .
80
TRACTOR-TRAILERS
.,
,.,....,OC*lg.....
thm85mptl
..
PMlIllllgeQOing l8ItIr1lWl70 ....
2lI
0
. . . . . . . . . ,. . . . . . ' . ' . . . 1. . . .
where slower speed limits were retained.
The number of cars in Maryland exceeding 70 mph remained essentially unchanged, too - 7 percent in June 1988
and 6 percent in July. The percentage of
cars exceeding 70 mph in Virginia went up
from 8 percent in June 1988 to 17 percent
one month later.
By July 1992, when the Institute's study
concluded, 7 percent 01 cars in Maryland
were going faster than 70 mph. This compares with 29 percent going faster than 70
in Virginia.
Universal Tendency: Motorists everywhere tend to drive somewhat faster than
posted speed limits, no matter what the
limits are. The national maximum speed
limit for cars in Great Britain, for example,
is 70 mph. Yet a 1992 speed survey conducted at motorway sites by the Department of Transport found that 60 percent
of cars were traveling faster than 70 mph.
Twenty-three percent were going faster
than 80 mph. Plus, about 40 percent of
heavy goods vehicles were exceeding
their posted speed limit of 60 mph.
Even though so many drivers speed on
British motorways. authorities there decided in 199J not to raise speed limits to
80 mph. (See Slatus Repon, Vol. 26, No.9,
Ocl. 19, 1991.) Officials concluded at the
time that raising speed limits would translate into even laster travel speeds.
/IllS Status Report, Val. 28, No.8, July 3, 1993-3
New Rules Are Afoot
For States to Measure
Speed Umit Compliance
Under the national maximum 55 mph
speed limit, every siale had to monitor
overall travel speeds and report the results to the U.s. Department of Transportation. II a majority of drivers weren't complying, a state risked losing federal funds.
When Congress permitted states to
raise speed limits to 65 mph in 1987, compliance requirements remained lor roads
posted al 55. But no requirements were
implemented lor rural interstates posted
at 65. Slates that retained 55 across-theboard cried foul, and in 1988 Congress
suspended compliance penalties but lold
2"'"
De8lhs on '"*- HIghweya
In 40 Stall. IIeIont -.cI AII8r
8511PH SplOd LJmIta
,,
,,
,,
,,, ,,,
, ,
;--+__ l1li15.
- . ....5& . . ..-.
.....
states 10 continue monitoring speeds on
highways posted at 55 mph.
Now the Department 01 Transportation
is proposing new compliance criteria. and
a decision is expected shortly. The Insti·
tute supports a national compliance standard against which all states would be
measured. This formula would be weighted
so the fastest travel speeds would count
the most heavily against a state's compliance score. Penalties would be heavier on
roads with the greatest fatality risk.
The Institute generally supports these
provisions, but there's one glitch. The pr"
posed standard is based on compliance
with posted speed limits. States that post
55 on rural interstates - even though
Congress would allow 65 - could end up
with more motorists exceeding the limit
compared with states that have adopted
65. This would be true even though overall
travel speeds would be slower under 55.
The Inslilute recommends treating rural interstate speed profiles from all states
the same whether 55 or 65 mph is the posted limit because speeds above 70 mph, for
example, pose comparable risks no matter
what the limit is. Among states that responded to the proposed compliance criteria, western ones with 65 mph speed limits
~'ere often opposed while states that have
retained 55 were generally supportive.
_11.
,.
1.
ft._
,.
'*
NIIa:_tlligIn , . .
3f,18I7.faIIr_
In 1117,
DIe.
011
tIJO'C',f,1.
For Sixth Year in a Row, Deaths on U.S. Rural
Interstate Highways Are Much Higher Than
Before Speed Umits Were Raised to 65 MPH
The safety consequences of traveling
at higher speeds can be counted in terms
of lives lost. In the 40 states where speed
limits were raised to 65 mph on rural illterstate highways during 1987 and '88,
deaths on these roads were 17 percent
higher in 1992, compared with the average
number of deaths on the same roads during 1982.86.
This is the sixth year in a row of greatly increased deaths on rural interstate
highways with higher speed limits, com-pared with 1982.86, the five years before
Congress permitted raising speed limits to
65 mph on these roads. (See Slotus Report,
Vol. 26, No.8, Sept. 14, 1991.) Meanwhile,
deaths on rural interstates in jurisdictions
where 55 mph speed limits have been retained were 28 percent lower in 1992 com·
pared with 1982-86.
And what about urban interstate highways in the same 40 states? Congress directed states to retain 55 mph speed limits on these roads, and deaths in 1992
were 8percent/ower than in 1982.86.
-In these 40 states, deaths on rural and
urban interstates have declined in the last
few years,· says Institute President Brian
O'Neill, -but the significant thing is, it's Oillyon the rural segments that deaths COiltinue much higher than when 55 was in eflect on all roads.·
The Institute along with a coalition of
health, safety, law enforcement, and insur·
4-IIHSStatus Reporl, Val. 28, Na. 8, July 3, 1993
llHS Status Reporl, Vol. 28, No.8, July 3, 1993-5
ance organizations told Congress in 1987
that highway deaths and injuries would increase along with travel speeds. As New
Jersey's police superintendent said then,
~The only questions are what the increase
will be and whether we're ready to sacrifice lives to save time."
A new study quantifies how much
deadlier it is to crash at higher speeds.
The driver fatality risk in a crash sharply
rises with the impact speed, and each
doubling of impact speed increases the
risk of death almost fifteenfold.
Hans C. Joksch of the Mid-Atlantic Research Institute in West Hartford, Connecticut analyzed 1981-86 crash data for
1980 and later model passenger cars. His
research shows that even small changes
in crash speed make a large difference in
the risk of car occupant deaths.
sa
estimated Percentage of
DrIvers KIIIecI.s. Function
Of Velocity Change (Deit8 Vj,
1980-86 Model C8rs
During 198H16
4U
20
oI.
o
•
.........-,
10
20
30
De~a
,
4(J
50
60
V (mpO)
In a 10 mph impact, drivers have less
than a 1 in 1,000 chance of dying. If the impact speed is 20 mph, the probability 01
death increases to about 7 in 1,000. In an
impact at 60 mph, the probability that the
driver will die is more than 50 percent. In
general, a 10 percent increase in crash
speed increases the risk of driver death
by nearly 45 percent.
~Velocity Change and Fatality Risk in a
Crash -a Rule 01 Thumb~ by Hans C.
Joksch appeared in Accidenl Analysis and
Prevention, Vol. 25, pp. 103-04.
Safety Advocates Fear Lower Safety Standards for Big Truck Rigs Will Result
From Current Negotiations to Achieve North American Free Trade Agreement
The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) is concerned primarily with
economic issues, not highway safety. Government officials say NAffA won't lower
truck safety standards in the United
States, but highway safety advocates fear
it may lead to a weakening of U.S. standards in the interest ollacilitating trade
with Canada and Mexico, which have less
stringent truck safety standards.
If NAITA wins congressional approval,
it will eliminate over a Io-year period all
restrictions on movement of international
cargo transported by motor carriers and
will "harmonize~ transportation safety
standards among the United States. Canada. and Mexico.
Although NAFTA encourages Canada
and Mexico to enact tougher truck safety
regulations. it doesn't require them 10 do
so. Highway salety advocates fear that,
during the harmonization process, the
United Slates could raise truck load capacity weight limits, allow longer combination vehicles on roads nationwide, and
extend the hours truckers can drive to
match Canadian and Mexican regulations.
Agovernment subcommittee has the
task 01 making truck safely standards
compatible among Ihe three countries.
The subcommittee will review such things
as the weighls and dimensions of vehicles, tires, brakes, parts and accessories,
truck maintenance and repair, inspections, vehicle emissions, and truck drivers' age and health.
"The NAFTA harmonization process
shouldn't be used to the detriment of motor vehicle safety, ~ says Stephen L. Oesch,
the Institute's senior vice president and
general counsel. "After long-fought battles,
we've made important progress toward
improving truck safety regulations in the
United Slates, and NAFTA just shouldn't
be used as a back-door way of degrading
those standards. M
Joan Claybrook, co-chairman of Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways,
warned Congress earlier this year that
~the NAffA harmonization process fails to
include any saleguard against the lowering 01 our truck safety standards .... 11
could result in huge, poorly maintained,
overweight trucks (some with triple trailers) and unqualified or latigued drivers on
our highways.M
Government officials argue that NAfiA
requires foreign transporters to meet and
abide by the safety standards 01 the country in which they're traveling. "There are
no provisions in NAffA that exempt Mexican or Canadian vehicles or drivers from
U.S. safety standards," Nancy K. MacRae
told Congress. MacRae is the deputy director of the U.S. Department of Transportation's Olfice 01 International Transportation and Trade. ~The agreement
specifically states that each country retains the right to adopt and enforce standards lor the protection of life, health,
consumers, and the environment that may
be more stringent than standards in effect
in other countries," MacRae also says.
On the other hand, Claybrook points
out Ihat NAITA ~allows another country
to challenge federal, state, or local envlronmental, health, or safety laws or rules
that are claimed to inhibit the other country's trade opportunities with the United
States. If judged in secret by a trade dis-
pute panel to be in conflict with the trade
rules, the United States would be instructed to stop enforcing such a requirement
against the complaining party or ... face
trade sanctions. M
Already NAFTA is being used by some
groups to influence lawmakers to lower
existing truck safely standards. The Western Association 01 State Highway and
Transportation Officials wants Congress
to include in the treaty a provision allowing states to permit longer combination
rigs (tractor-trailers longer than 75 leet
that include double or triple trailers).
Twenty slates, mostly in the western part
of the country, and some provinces in
Canada already permit such rigs. Two
years ago, Congress imposed a moratorium on them in states where they weren't
already allowed.
The American Trucking Associations,
white not asking directly for higher truck
weight limits, told Congress that U.s. limits place American manufacturers ~at a
competitive disadvantage in the international market. M
In the United States, the maximum
gross weight limit lor trucks is 80,000
pounds without a special permit. Canada
allows 137,()()().pound trucks, and Mexico
allows 170,()()().pound trucks.
The problem with very long rigs and
trucks carrying heavyweight loads is that
they're difficult 10 maneuver and require
long stopping distances. (See Status
Repo", Vol. 27, No. 12, Oct. 3, 1992.) Cambination truck rigs are involved in 1-1/2
times as many fatal crashes per 100 million miles as passenger vehicles.
Although the United States lets traclortrailer drivers work 10 hours at a stretch
after resting for 8 hours, Canada permits
drivers behind the wheel 13 hours a day.
Mexico imposes no time restrictions. Institute research has shown thai drivers
who've been on the road for more than
eight hours are at nearly twice the risk of
being in a crash compared with drivers on
the road for less than Iwo hours. (See Status Repo", Vol. 22, No. 10, Sept. 19, 1987.)
6-I1HS 51aIUS Report, Vol. 28, Na. ~ July ~ 1993
1lEFl'
25
c..-
'''''1'''' br
VehI*
DII....,
--
• L.J,~-:!,--!-.__.!--:!.'--!..
.------
More Cars Per Mile Mean More Occupant Injuries, Crash Damage, Theft
The chances that a driver will file an insurance claim for injury, vehicle damage,
or theft go up as the number 01 cars per
square mile increases. Vehicle damage
claims are almost 40 percent higher theft claims are more than 100 percent
higher - in areas with the highest num-
ber of cars per square mile (1,000 or
more). compared with areas with the
lewest cars (50 or fewer) per square mile.
This is the major finding of a new
Highway Loss Data Institute (HLDI) report.
HLDI is closely affiliated with the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety.
Drivers who have personal injury protection coverage and live in areas with
the highest concentration of vehicles,
such as Philadelphia, have a 23 percent
greater chance 01 filing an insurance injury claim than those Jiving in areas such
as Glades County, Florida, with the least
number of vehicles per square mile.
For th~ speci~ report, HlDI used 1990
census data to group all U.s. counties and
independent cities into six vehicle density
categories based on numbers of cars per
square mile. Insurance claims data were
examined for 199()'92 model cars, vans,
pickup trucks, and utility vehicles by size
class and body style.
Collision claim frequencies are higher
lor all size class and body style combinations in the more dense areas of the United States. Smalltwo-door models and midsize sports cars have the highest collision
claim frequencies. Overall collision losses,
/IllS Status Report, Val. 28, No.8, July 3, 1993-7
which take into account both claim frequencies and sizes of loss payments, are
about 30 percent higher in the most dense
areas compared with the least dense.
The highest theft claim frequencies are
lor small utility vehicles in the areas with
the highest vehicle density, The average
theft claim in the most dense areas is
about SI,OOO, or 35 percent higher than in
the least dense areas.
Injury claim frequencies increase as vehicle density increases lor nearly all of the
size class and body style combinations
presented in the report. Small cars have
the highest injury claim frequencies in all
six density categories.
~The pattern of increasing insurance
losses with increasing vehicle density for
late model passenger cars is consistent
with earlier HLDl research,~ says HLDI
President Brian O'Neill.
Consumer Response to
Child Restraint Recalls
Is Extremely Poor
NHTSA Urges Seal Owners
To Respond By Contacting
Manufacturers For Repair Kits
Concerned about low response rates to
several child safety seat recalls, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) has issued a consumer advisory urging owners to call manufacturers
for free repair kits.
The agency lists 13 safety seat recalls
that have been announced for at least six
months but have resulted in fewer than 20
percent of child seats being repaired,
Stressing the importance of responding to
the recalls, NHTSA also reminds owners
that children should continue using the
safety seats until the repair kits arrive,
NHTSA proVides a list of recalls with
low response rates and includes toll-free
telephone numbers for manufacturers:
• Casco Inc., 800/544-1108: 50lt Shield
models 02-Q90 and 02-190; Auto Trac models 02-D290, 02-790, and 02-890; and Deluxe
Commuter model 02-DS6
t Evenflo Juvenile Products Company,
800/837-8926: Ultara II model 227
t Fisher-Price, SOO/527·1034: models
9100 and 9101
• Kaleralt Praducts Inc., 800/453-7673:
Perfect FiU models 181)-200 and 181)-150;
Playskool models 140-155 and 180-400;
Traveler 700 car seat; and Dial-a-FiU II
model 181)-160
t Takata-Gerico Corporation, SOO/8458813: Gerry Guardian car seat
For information about these or other
safety recalls, call NHTSA at 800/424-9393
(202/36lH1123 in the Washington, DC area).
In related action, NHTSA has announced the recall of a child seat replacement part that was issued during a previous recall. Certain Century child seat
models - 3000 STE/3500 STE and 5000
STE/5500 STE - had faulty buckle release
buttons that, under an earlier recall, were
repaired with red buttons. (See Status Report, Vol. 27, No. 14, Nov. 21,1992.)
These bullons may have been the
wrong part and, NHTSA says, the wrong
red release button could result in an improper latch that wouldn't adequately
protect a child in a sudden stop or a
crash, Century will send owners information about how to determine whether the
previously shipped red release button is
correct. If the wrong button was issued,
owners should contact Century at
800/554-5888 for the correct button.
£venflv's Ultam II model 227 and Fisher-Price's
9/01 model ha~'e been recalled, but consumer
response is poor, NHTSA says 13 child seal recalls have been announced for at least six
months, but fewer than 20 percent of the recalled seats have been repaired.
Vol. 28, No.8, July 3, 1993
On the Inside
65 mpb speed IIJuIIi haven't turned us
into a nation of law-abiders
p.l
Speed compUaoce formula for stales
set to be changed
p.3
Rural iotentate deatbl continue higher
on roads posted at 65 mph
p.3
NAfiA includes some sticky trans·
portation issues yet to be resolved ...p.4
Deo81ty of vehicles affects insurance
injury, collision, thelt losses
p.G
Cblld restraint recall. aren't being
heeded by most car seat owners ....... p.7
Kf
lOOS North GJebe Road
AtJjngtOll, VA 22201
(103) 247·1500 FAX (703) 247·1678
OIrtelOT oIl'ub!lcalioos/Edilor: Anne FlemIng
Wriltrs; Mw Kammann. Kim LaocilSlcr, and
ShuOll J. Rumus$tll
Editorial Assi$l1Jlt Car\enr, Hugbe$
C,rcuWlorL SbdIy Montganery
All DIrector~ SheIIa.lacbon
DeIIpJ, Production: IJiIhano Hill
nw: InsuIllCe mtltllIc lor Highwiy SUety Is an ~
dell. ~. sdmlilic Illd ulucitiooll orpnlulion. h
It dedbttd to rtducioll the Ioues - ~ IrJjuriet. and
propert)" c\amlrItt - rtsuIlmg &u. cnsIw$ 0Il1ht IWIoo '$
Iti&tJwtys. The Institute 15 supported by the AlDer\Qn InRDllCe ~
SaIely AssocIItIon.lhe AmerkJn Iniurm
AIYnce. the NItIooaI Alsociition 0/ Iflde.
pm;knt 1n5urcn; ~ Assodation. md , number 01 indio
~WlY Safety
vidualln$urlntt compani!'5.
COO1mt1 may be republished w!loIe, Of In part...11h amI·
butloo.1I you m IlOI now r«tiving ~ RtptXl oot would
Ilke to. cooUd lllf Communications Department.
ISSN 0018·988X