Bigger Trucks are a Bigger Problem

There is a new push to allow bigger trucks on the roads and highways of America. Trucking companies are talking about longer trucks and trucks with double and triple trailers. This is a BAD IDEA. See my earlier blog titled Overloaded Trucks Kill.

The Wall Street Journal (8/16/2010 p.B1) indicated the push in congress is coming from 150 companies who want to make trucks 20% heavier. This would make the average truck go from 80,000 pds to 96,000 pounds. The longer heavier trucks would increase the blind areas or "no zones" around the tractor trailer as well as making them harder to stop. While trucks may have increased breaking capacity, passenger cars and pickup trucks wont have any additional structural support added to withstand the impact from these monster trucks. Even if passenger cars were made to withstand these forces, it would be impossible to retrofit the 100's of millions of cars currently on the road.

In addition to consumer safety organizations that uniformly think this is a bad idea, OIDA (Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association) has stated that the stability of a tractor trailer is "substantially reduced on bigger and heavier trucks." Rollovers are already the leading cause of truck driver deaths, this proposal would make one of the most deadly professions worse. One government official, a truck inspector, was quoted in the WSJ article as stating the idea is "insane." He could actually feel the bridges bounce with trucks, and the heavier the trucks the more the bridge bounced. Do we really need the extra strain on the bridges and roadways of America? Do we really need another bridge to collapse like in 2007 in Minneapolis?

Nancy Reagan had it right. JUST SAY NO!

NATURAL GAS TANKER TRUCKS A DANGER IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD?

Recently a Liquid Natural Gas producer suggested they should be allowed to deliver LNG from Savannah, GA throughout the south, to include Atlanta. The full story written by Mary Landers can be seen here.

What is the danger? Outside of normal wrecks, tankers are prone to rollovers, a topic I have blogged about repeatedly in the past. LNG tankers make perfect terrorist bombs. If the LNG tanker leaks its 13,000 gallons of LNG, its contents change from liquid to vapor, which will expand about 600 times, and then explode. In 1944 a LNG explosion leveled one square mile of Cleveland. a photo I found on the web of the aftermath is shown below:

How bad an idea is this? Look at the research done on the impact of a LNG ship in Boston Harbor. An LNG ship blowing up has been described as having a force multiple times the impact of the nuclear bomb that hit Hiroshima.

How to comment on LNG trucks on Derenne

The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission regulates the LNG industry.

Comments about the proposed truck-loading facility and Elba Island, including concerns about increased traffic, should be sent to FERC by Sept. 7 to help shape the commission's environmental assessment.
 

The commission strongly encourages electronic filings of comments, protests and interventions in lieu of paper using the "eFiling" link at www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal Energy regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426.

An official time frame for the project has not yet been developed, but a spokeswoman estimated it would take 12-18 months from the company's Aug. 4 application to FERC date for commission to decide on the matter.

EXTREME CAUTION REQUIRED UNDER FMCSR 392.14 FOR TRUCK DRIVERS IN BAD WEATHER

Another difference between driving a car and driving a truck is FMCSR 392.14 which requires truck drivers to use "extreme caution" in weather that effects visibility or traction. Truckers are trained, through the Commercial Drivers License Manual and presumably their company, that they must use extreme caution in bad weather. Those truck drivers that cause a wreck by ignoring their training, failing to pull off or even slow down, must be held accountable.

In Weaver v. Chavez, decided 11/7/05, a district appeals court in California held that a trial court's failure to instruct the jury on the standard of care of "extreme caution" in adverse weather, pursuant to 49 C.F.R. § 392.14, rather than the negligence standard under state traffic law, was reversible error.

INJURED IN MICHIGAN? YOU HAVE IMPORTANT RIGHTS AS A RESULT OF A NEW CASE!

If you have been injured in Michigan and told you have "No Case" by a lawyer after a wreck, you need to understand the huge change in Michigan law, as a result of the Michigan Supreme Court's Opinion in McCormick v. Carrier

This new case allows the injured in Michigan to proceed to trial even if they would have previously been denied under Michigan's strict and harsh auto accident "threshold" law. This case, released July 31, 2010, allows you to recover for your injuries even if you did not meet the "threshold" requirement.

For more on this important change see the blog posted here.

Michigan Cell Phone Laws Changed as of July 1, 2010

My thanks to Steven Gursten who alerted me to the recent change in cell phone laws in Michigan. Steve's post on the new Michigan cell phone law can be found here.

DOT FINALLY COMES AROUND AND CONSIDERS SEAT BELTS ON BUSES

This is an issue I feel strongly about. BUSES NEED SEAT BELTS. I have blogged on this before on several different occasions. (Here, here, and here for example).

Monday, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced new buses would be required to have lap-shoulder belts. The article I saw did not reference when the rule would take effect (generally three years from the final published rule), and whether buses would be required to be retrofitted. It did state that most bus fatalities occurred when passengers were thrown from a bus in a rollover, and that seat belts would cut that risk by 77%.

Given that the study showed that 65% of all bus passengers are children and the elderly, isn't it past time we had seat belts on buses? 

The full NHTSA proposed rule can be found here.

State Laws Regarding Cell Phone Use and Texting While Driving

Driver distraction, to include cell phone use, is a major cause of wrecks. This is a huge issue in the trucking industry as truck drivers are required to frequently update their company and are on the road weeks at a time, leaving the cell phone their only means of communication with vendors, friends, and family.

Proving that a truck or bus driver was actually texting while driving, or on a cell phone, is difficult and generally requires a lawyer. Records must be subpoened from the service provider. These records are often destroyed after a few months, thus having a lawyer fighting for you in a serious truck or bus accident case is critical.

Paralegal superstar Janabeth Fleming Taylor recently sent me the link to the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety's list of cell phone laws in the US. The list can be seen here and is pasted below for your convenience.

 

Cellphone laws

July 2010


A jurisdiction-wide ban on driving while talking on a hand-held cellphone is in place in 9 states (California, Connecticut, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Utah, and Washington) and the District of Columbia. Utah has named the offense careless driving. Under the Utah law, no one commits an offense when speaking on a cellphone unless they are also committing some other moving violation other than speeding.

Local jurisdictions may or may not need specific state statutory authority to ban cellphones. Localities that have enacted restrictions on cellphone use include: Oahu, HI; Chicago, IL; Brookline, MA; Detroit, MI; Santa Fe, NM; Brooklyn, North Olmstead, and Walton Hills, OH; Conshohocken, Lebanon, and West Conshohocken, PA; Waupaca County, WI; and Cheyenne, WY.

The use of all cellphones while driving a school bus is prohibited in 19 states and the District of Columbia.

The use of all cellphones by novice drivers is restricted in 28 states and the District of Columbia.

Text messaging is banned for all drivers in 30 states and the District of Columbia. In addition, novice drivers are banned from texting in 8 states (Alabama, Indiana, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Texas, and West Virginia) and school bus drivers are banned from text messaging in 2 states (Oklahoma, and Texas).

The table below shows the states that have cellphone laws, whether they specifically ban text messaging, and whether they are enforced as primary or secondary laws. Under secondary laws, an officer must have some other reason to stop a vehicle before citing a driver for using a cellphone. Laws without this restriction are called primary.

 
  Laws restricting cellphone use and texting
State Hand-held ban Young drivers all cellphone ban Bus drivers all cellphone ban Texting ban Enforcement
Alabama no drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months no drivers age 16 and 17-year-old drivers who have held an intermediate license for fewer than 6 months primary
Alaska no no no all drivers primary
Arizona no no school bus drivers no primary
Arkansas drivers 18 or older but younger than 21 drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary: texting by all drivers and cellphone use by school bus drivers; secondary: cellphone use by young drivers1
California all drivers drivers younger than 18 school and transit bus drivers all drivers primary; secondary for hands-free cellphone use by young drivers1
Colorado no drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Connecticut all drivers drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Delaware all drivers (effective 01/02/11) learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers (effective 01/02/11) primary
District of Columbia all drivers learner's permit holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
Florida no no no no not applicable
Georgia no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Hawaii no no no no not applicable
Idaho no no no no not applicable
Illinois drivers in construction and school speed zones drivers younger than 19 and learner's permit holders younger than 19 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Indiana no drivers younger than 18 no drivers younger than 18 primary
Iowa no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary for learner's permit and intermediate license holders; secondary for texting
Kansas no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary
Kentucky no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
Louisiana with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 with respect to novice drivers, see footnote2 school bus drivers all drivers primary2 (effective 08/15/10)
Maine no learner's permit and intermediate license holders no learner's permit and intermediate license holders primary
Maryland all drivers (effective 10/01/10) learner's permit and provisional license holders younger than 18 (effective 10/01/10) school bus drivers (hand-held ban) (effective 10/01/10) all drivers secondary; primary for texting
Massachusetts no drivers younger than 18 (effective 09/30/10) school bus drivers (effective since 4/12/01) and passenger bus drivers (effective 09/30/10) all drivers (effective 09/30/10) primary
Michigan no no no all drivers primary
Minnesota no learner's permit holders and provisional license holders during the first 12 months after licensing school bus drivers all drivers primary
Mississippi no no no learner's permit and intermediate license holders primary
Missouri no no no drivers 21 and younger primary
Montana no no no no not applicable
Nebraska no learner's permit and intermediate license holders younger than 18 no all drivers secondary
Nevada no no no no not applicable
New Hampshire no no no all drivers primary
New Jersey all drivers learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
New Mexico no no no no not applicable
New York all drivers no no all drivers primary; secondary for text messaging
North Carolina no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
North Dakota no no no no not applicable
Ohio no no no no not applicable
Oklahoma learner's permit and intermediate license holders (effective 11/01/10) no3 school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) learner's permit holders, intermediate license holders, school bus drivers and public transit drivers (effective 11/01/10) primary (effective 11/01/10)
Oregon all drivers drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Pennsylvania no no no no not applicable
Rhode Island no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers primary
South Carolina no no no no not applicable
South Dakota no no no no not applicable
Tennessee no learner's permit and intermediate license holders school bus drivers all drivers primary
Texas drivers in school crossing zones intermediate license holders for the first twelve months bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present bus drivers when a passenger 17 and younger is present; intermediate license holders for first twelve months; drivers in school crossing zones primary
Utah all drivers no no all drivers primary for texting; secondary for talking on a hand-held cellphone4
Vermont no drivers younger than 18 no all drivers primary
Virginia no drivers younger than 18 school bus drivers all drivers secondary; primary for school bus drivers
Washington all drivers learner's permit and intermediate license holders no all drivers primary
West Virginia no drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license no drivers younger than 18 who hold either a learner's permit or an intermediate license primary
Wisconsin no no no all drivers (effective 12/01/10) primary (effective 12/01/10)
Wyoming no no no all drivers primary

1The laws in Arkansas and California prohibit police from stopping a vehicle to determine if a driver is in compliance with the law. Clearly, that language prohibits the use of checkpoints to enforce the law, but it has been interpreted as the functional equivalent of secondary provisions that typically state the officer may not stop someone suspected of a violation unless there is other, independent, cause for a stop.

2In Louisiana, all learner's permit holders, irrespective of age, and all intermediate license holders are prohibited from driving while using a hand-held cellphone and all drivers younger than 18 are prohibited from using any cellphone. Effective April 1, 2010 all drivers, irrespective of age, issued a first driver’s license will be prohibited from using a cellphone for one year. The cellphone ban is secondary for novice drivers age 18 and older.

3In Oklahoma, learner's permit and intermediate license holders are banned from using a hand-held electronic device while operating a motor vehicle for non-life-threatening emergency purposes.

4Utah's law defines careless driving as committing a moving violation (other than speeding) while distracted by use of a hand-held cellphone or other activities not related to driving.

 

New Hours of Service (HOS) Regulation to White House

The FMCSA, in compliance with the settlement agreement in the lawsuit brought by Public Citizen and other public interest groups, sent its new proposed hours of service (HOS) regulations to the White House. The FMCSA now has until July 2011 to publish the new rule.

The HOS regulations govern how long a truck driver can work before having to take time off to rest. The are in place because it is well known that a tired fatigued driver is a dangerous driver, far more likely to be in a wreck. I have multiple posts on the dangers of fatigue as this is a huge issue in the trucking industry. I have posted on the harsh conditions driver endure when forced to work long hours before, conditions that have caused many to call trucks rolling sweatshops and increased the danger to everyone that uses the roads and highways of America.

The last time the HOS rules were amended was on Jan 4, 2004, when the time a driver was able to spend driving was increased from 10 hours to 11 hours. HOS regulations were first adopted in 1939. There was a modification in 1962 and then again in 1995. The 2004 modifications, extending a driver's hours, brought about the current lawsuit and settlement, requiring the FMCSA to publish a new HOS rule.

ROADCHECK SHOWS TRUCK DRIVERS STILL FAKING LOG BOOKS

One of the startling numbers that have been released from the 2010 Roadcheck was that violations for false logs were up over 18% from 2009. I have previously blogged about the problems with false logs and how tired truckers are dangerous truckers who are 2.5 times more likely to be in a wreck. While electric on-board recorders (EOBR's) are a long way from perfect, they will surely be better than the method we have now.

There are multiple other posts on this blog on the topics of fatigue, sleep apnea, and the dangers of tired truckers because so many people are killed each year as a result of these drivers trying to just get in a  few more miles. Drive safe and pull over when tired!

NEW OFFICERS FOR THE AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR JUSTICE's INTERSTATE TRUCKING LITIGATION GROUP

In Vancouver, Canada the Interstate Trucking Litigation Group (ITLG) elected its new Officers and Board Members and presented the first ever ITLG Chairman's Award was presented to Robert Collins. The new Officers and Board Members, all fine trucking lawyers, are:

Brad Bradshaw, Missouri - Chair

Dan Munley, Pennsylvania - Vice-Chair

 

Dan Buba, Indiana - Secretary

 

Robert Collins, Texas - Treasurer

 

Larry Simon, New Jersey  - Special Projects

 

Jeff Burns, Missouri - Publications Editor

 

Dan Linebaugh, Texas - Board Member for a 4 year term

 

Marion Munley, Pennsylvania - Board Member for a 4 year term

 

Morgan Adams, Tennessee - Past-Chair

 

In addition Robert Collins was given the Chairman's Award. It was my pleasure to present the award to Robert in front of his peers. You can't always choose with whom you work , but when you are lucky enough to have a leader of Robert's caliber on your team many difficult things are made easy. The award can be seen here.