Introduction Welcome to TruckAccidentInfo.com. This blog has been created by the law Ohio law firm of Clark, Perdue & List Co, LPA as a public service to promote truck safety and as a resource to motorists who have been injured in truck crashes. If you have questions about this website or have additional questions about trucking accidents, please contact us through our website at www.ClarkPerdue.com.
|
On October 28, 2008, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) issued its annual list of Most Wanted Safety Improvements. The list is designed to raise public awareness about transportation safety issues for many modes of transportation, including airplanes, trains, oil pipelines, and commercial trucks.
Relating to commercial trucking, the NTSB again advocates for the mandatory use of on-board electronic data recorders to assure compliance with hours of service regulations. Also, the NTSB seeks adoption of more stringent regulations to prevent medically unqualified drivers from operating commercial vehicles. In particular, the NTSB recommends:
- Establishing a comprehensive medical oversight program for interstate commercial drivers.
- Ensuring that medical examiners are qualified.
- Tracking all medical certificate applications
- Enhancing oversight and enforcement of invalid medical certificates, and
- Providing mechanisms for reporting medical conditions.
The NTSB notes that the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s response to these issues has been “unacceptable.”
The NTSB is an independent Federal agency charged by Congress with investigating every civil aviation accident in the United States and significant accidents in the other modes of transportation — railroad, highway, marine and pipeline — and issuing safety recommendations aimed at preventing future accidents. It’s most recent list of Most Wanted Transportation Safety Improvements can be found here.
In July 2007, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) released the results of The Large Truck Crash Causation Study (LTCCS). The goal of the study was to pin point the cause of the estimated 141,000 fatal or injury accidents involving large trucks in the 33 months between April 2001 and December 2003. The LTCCS closely examined a sample of 963 crashes which resulted in 249 deaths and 1123 injuries. For each crash, up to 1000 data elements were collected, including the condition of the truck driver and other drivers involved in the crash, the behavior of the drivers during the crash, the condition of the vehicles, the condition of the road, and the weather.
Of the crashes in which a heavy truck was identified as the primary reason for the crash, 87% were attributed to a failure of the driver, 10% were attributed to a failure of the vehicle, and 3% were attributed to environmental conditions. The LTCCS also identified the factors most strongly associated with the risk of a truck crash, including cargo shift, driver illness, illegal maneuvers, following traffic too closely, and driver inattention. Hopefully, the results of the LTCCS will serve as a guide to law makers in the creation of appropriate safety regulations to protect the motoring public.
A summary of the LTCCS is available here. For complete information about the LTCCS, including the original data, the methodology, and the resulting report to Congress, visit the LTCCS website here.
Federal regulations limit the number of hours commercial truck drivers may stay on-duty. These rules have been modified over the years in an effort reach a balance between safety and efficiency. Currently, the rules impose daily and weekly limits on the number of hours commercial truck drivers are permitted to work. Generally, drivers are permitted to work no more than 14 consecutive hours. Of that time, only 11 hours may be devoted to driving. (The remaining time may be devoted to paperwork, loading and unloading, etc.) After exhausting these limits, drivers are required to spend a minimum of 10 consecutive hours off duty. The regulations also prohibit driving after being on-duty more than 60 hours in 7 consecutive days, or 70 hours in 8 consecutive days. Drivers may restart the 60 or 70 hour clock by taking no less than 34 consecutive hours off duty.
A recent Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) study sheds light on whether these regulations, if properly followed and enforced, are likely to be effective. (See Analysis of Risk as a Function of Driving-Hour: Assessment of Driving Hours 1 through 11 Final Report. The shorter ‘Tech Brief‘ summary is here.) This study does not support the hypothesis that driving 10 or 11 hours is more unsafe than driving fewer hours. In fact, the study suggests that driver performance in hours 2 through 11 is about the same. Oddly, drivers performed worst during the first hour of driving.
Overall, the study concludes that “time on task” is a poor predictor of driver performance. More relevant, the study suggests, is time of day. The highest incidence of unsafe performance occurred during times of heavy traffic conditions.
In September 2003, a Fresno California truck driver fell asleep at the wheel, causing a multi-vehicle crash resulting in the death of a father and son. Investigation revealed that the driver had been driving for 19 consecutive hours, greatly exceeding the maximum hours of service permitted by federal regulations. Ultimately, five truckers at the same company plead guilty to falsifying their log books.
Given the competitive nature of the trucking industry, it is unfortunate, but not surprising, that commercial truck drivers sometimes violate the hours of service regulations and alter their records to escape detection. In recognition of these temptations, trucking companies must institute practices and procedures to encourage their drivers to comply with the law. In this tragic case, however, just the opposite occurred. The trucking company executives actually conspired with drivers to falsify records to hide routine safety violations.
In June 2008, executives of Nijjar Brothers Trucking Inc. were sentenced for aiding and abetting the falsification by their drivers of official documents required by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety regulations. The trucking company owners face prison, probation, and fines, all of which will come as little comfort to the families of the victims.
The investigation of most motor vehicle crashes focuses on the conduct of the driver. Truck crash investigation must also focus on the conduct of the trucking company which may foster a culture of unsafe trucking practices. Public safety demands this emphasis on corporate accountability.
On July 9, 2008, the House of Representatives Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee on Transportation and Infrastructure took testimony on the subject of truck weight and length regulations. Generally, federal regulations limit truck weight to a maximum of 20,000 pounds for single axles, 34,000 pounds for tandem axles, with a total Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW) limit of 80,000 pounds. These limits have been in effect since 1974.
The issue of whether trucks of greater width and weight should be allowed on our highways has recently received greater attention. Generally, the trucking industry contends that larger trucks are needed to handle an ever increasing flow of cargo across the country. Safety advocates, on the other hand, claim that bigger trucks will increase to number of truck related crashes and damage our aging roads and bridges.
On behalf of the Teamster’s Union, truckers testified that larger trucks would be unsafe. Specifically, they argued that road widths, automobile traffic, and short highway entrance ramps all make bigger trucks too dangerous. Trucking industry representatives, on the other hand, claim that bigger trucks are needed to off-set increased fuel costs, address increased demand for freight transportation, and harmonize federal and state regulations.
A summary of the hearing subject matter, the written testimony of the witnesses, and a video of the hearing itself are all available at the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee website.
In a move to prevent truckers from cheating on mandatory drug testing, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (”FMCSA”) announced a new rule on June 25 that requires drug testers to check for evidence of tempering with urine samples. The new rule addresses concern over the availability and use of products designed to alter urine samples to hide illegal drug usage. As part of the findings in support of the new rule, the FMCSA noted: “The DOT continues to believe that mandatory testing for specimen validity is an appropriate response to the use of adulterants and attempts to subvert the collection and testing process.”
If drug testers detect possible tampering, under some circumstances, the new rule requires, for example, collection of another urine sample under “direct observation”.
The new rule is available in its entirety here. It goes into effect on August 25.
The Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) held its annual Roadcheck from June 3 through June 5, 2008. The CVSA is an association of state, provincial, and federal officials responsible for the administration and enforcement of motor carrier safety laws in the United States, Canada and Mexico. More than 10,000 truck safety inspectors conducted non-stop truck inspections in 1500 locations throughout the United States, Canada, and Mexico.
The results of past Roadchecks are sobering. In 2007, for example, the CVSA conducted more than 62,000 inspections. More than 21% of trucks inspected were placed out of service for mechanical problems, as were more than 6% of drivers. National statistics for 2008 are not yet available, but the Texas highway patrol reports a similarly significant number of safety violations again this year, with more than 24% of inspected vehicles taken out of service in Texas. These violations predominately involved brake systems, tire or wheel problems, and light malfunctions.
The results of Roadchecks from 2001 through 2006 is available at the CVSA website here.
On October 10, 2007, the Commercial Motor Vehicle Advanced Safety Technology Tax Act of 2007 (H.R. 3820) was introduced in the House of Representatives. The bill seeks to encourage the use of advanced safety technology in commercial trucking by providing a tax credit to trucking companies.
The legislation’s “congressional findings” detail the tremendous human and economic costs associated with truck crashes:
(1) Commercial motor vehicle crashes remain a primary source of concern in the United States, particularly in light of the increasing numbers of trucks and motorcoaches on the Nation’s roads and their critical role in the transportation of hazardous materials.
(2) A 2004 report by the National Cooperative Highway Research Program found that when a large truck is involved in a crash, it is about 2.6 times as likely to result in a fatality compared with passenger cars.
(3) The number of fatalities associated with large truck crashes is a significant portion of all crash fatalities in the United States. In 2005, 5,212 individuals died and 114,000 individuals were injured as a result of large truck-related crashes in the United States. Overall, from 2001 to 2005, there have been 25,533 large truck-related fatalities in the United States.
(4) In addition to the tremendous human loss, these crashes also impose a significant economic cost on society. The Department of Transportation estimates that highway crashes cost society $230.6 billion a year, about $820 per person. A 2006 report issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration determined that the estimated cost of each crash involving a truck with a gross vehicle weight rating of more than 10,000 pounds is $91,112 while the average cost of a fatal crash is $3,604,518.
(5) Investments by vehicle suppliers and truck and motorcoach manufacturers in research and innovative design have created a new generation of advanced safety systems and technologies.
(6) Advanced safety technologies will directly address, and help mitigate the effects of, commercial motor vehicle crash scenarios.
(7) The Department of Transportation has set a goal to reduce the traffic fatality rate to 1.0 per hundred million vehicle miles traveled by 2011.
(8) The accelerated production, sale, and deployment of advanced safety technologies on commercial motor vehicles can speed the progress toward this critical goal and reduce the daily injuries and fatalities on the Nation’s roads and highways. This progress would also help to mitigate the societal cost of these crashes.
(9) Therefore, Congress finds that it is in the interest of the United States to increase the deployment of advanced vehicle safety technologies on commercial motor vehicles in the domestic market by providing businesses with tax incentives, designed to make such systems more affordable for purchase.
(The full text of the bill is available at the Library of Congress website by searching for ‘H3820′.)
The bill proposes to give a tax credit in an amount equal to one half of the cost of certain advanced technology safety systems including “brake stroke monitoring systems”, “lane departure warning systems”, “collision warning systems”, and “vehicle stability systems.” The tax credit is limited to $350,000 per trucking company.
Of course, the legislation is heavily favored by the companies which manufacture these safety systems, such as Bendix Commercial Vehicle Systems. Through its trade group, the Motor and Equipment Manufacturer’s Association, it recently lobbied congress, for the second time this year, for the passage of this legislation. From the standpoint of public safety, however, any measures designed to reduce the number and severity of truck crashes are welcome additions.
Truck safety advocates often battle with the trucking industry over truck safety legislation. Recently, the issue of truck weight limits took center stage. The trucking industry favors higher weight limits for more profitable operations. Truck safety advocates contend that heavier trucks pose greater risk to the motoring public.
On May 13 and 14 2008, the trucking industry group Americans for Safe and Efficient Transportation (ASET) hosted a “fly-in” to lobby congress for legislation increasing the weight limit for heavy trucks from the current 80,000 pounds to 97,000 pounds, a 21% increase. According to the ASET website, such a change would increase efficiency and decrease pollution.
As reported by the Washington Post (the articles are reprinted at the ASET website), the idea is opposed by certain key members of the Senate who quickly introduced legislation to prevent any increase of the weight limit, claiming that heavier trucks take longer to stop, cause more damage to public roads, and are more inclined to cause roll-over accidents. (This legislation, the Safe Truck Operations and Preservation Act, may be viewed at the Library of Congress website by searching for S3021.) These concerns are shared by truck safety advocacy groups such as Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety which outlines the dangers of heavier trucks in a “Fact Sheet” here.
Commercial truck drivers are subject to periodic drug and alcohol testing. A commercial truck driver is not permitted to drive with a Blood Alcohol Content (BAC) of greater than .02. Drivers testing at this level are not permitted to perform “safety-sensitive functions”, which includes driving, for at least 24 hours after the test. A driver whose BAC exceeds .04 may not return to duty without submitting to further testing. Drivers are also tested for marijuana, cocaine, opiates, amphetamines, and PCP.
On May 15, 2008, the General Accountability Office (GAO) issued a report recommending improvements in the enforcement of drug and alcohol safety rules regulating the trucking industry. The GAO notes that this is an important issue of public safety: previous studies have found that driving under the influence of drugs, alcohol, or both can increase the risk of truck crashes anywhere from two-to six-fold.
Some key findings of the GAO study are: 1) many carriers, especially new one, have no drug testing program at all; 2) drug users may avoid detection by “adulterating or substituting their urine specimens with products that are widely available and marketed as allowing drivers to ‘beat’ the test;” and 3) drivers who test positive may continue to drive by hopping from one job to the next. Perhaps most tellingly, the GAO concluded that the FMCSA is able to conduct, on average, only 13,000 compliance reviews annually even though there are over 700,000 carriers registered with the Department of Transportation.
The GAO’s report calls for the Secretary of Transportation to expedite improving safety audits and to implement a national database of drug testing information. The GAO also suggests that Congress consider (1) adopting legislation to ban “subversion products” used to “beat” drug testing, (2) providing FMCSA with additional authority over entities involved in the drug testing process, and (3) encouraging or requiring states to suspend commercial driver’s licenses of drivers who fail or refuse to take a drug test.
The full report of the GAO may be found here.
|
