Transport Topics online; Wednesday, April 25, 2007

HEADLINE: Groups Sue FMCSA Over Mexican-Trucks Plan

Winston-Salem ( North Carolina ) Journal; Thursday, April 26, 2007

COLUMNIST HEADLINE: Law change might have averted fiery death on road

Press release from US Senator Patty Murray; Thursday, April 19, 2007

HEADLINE: SEN. MURRAY EXAMINES ALARMING INCREASE IN DEATHS ON AMERICA 'S HIGHWAYS

---

---

 

Transport Topics online; Wednesday, April 25, 2007

HEADLINE: Groups Sue FMCSA Over Mexican-Trucks Plan

 

A coalition of groups led by Public Citizen the Teamsters Union said Tuesday they have filed suit against the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to block the federal government’s plan to allow a pilot program of Mexican trucks into the United States .

 

The suit was filed Monday in U.S. District Court in California , the groups said. Also joining Public Citizen — which had been a lead, and successful plaintiff in challenging FMCSA hours-of-service safety rules — were the Sierra Club, Environmental Law Foundation, a local truck drivers’ union branch and the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association.

 

FMCSA is an agency of the Department of Transportation, which announced the plan in late February to select Mexican trucking companies to perform long-haul operations across the U.S. border beyond the current commercial zone near the border.

 

DOT Secretary Mary Peters said at the time that FMCSA safety inspectors would travel to Mexico as part of the pilot program. The department said last month that the program would involve less than 1,000 trucks.

 

“The Bush administration is ignoring the American people in its zeal to open our borders to unsafe Mexican trucks,” said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. “This reckless pilot program must be stopped and the driving public protected.”

 

Joan Claybrook, Public Citizen’s president, said the “so-called pilot program was rushed through in secrecy to serve as a showpiece to permit the Bush administration to proclaim victory and declare the entire southern border open to unfettered, long-haul truck commerce before the end of 2008. Congress and the courts should not allow it.”

Winston-Salem ( North Carolina ) Journal; Thursday, April 26, 2007

 

COLUMNIST HEADLINE: Law change might have averted fiery death on road

Byline: Scott Sexton, JOURNAL COLUMNIST

 

Jim Conner never had a chance. He was minding his own business, sitting behind the wheel of his 2004 Mercury sedan on U.S. 158 on April 17 when a tractor-trailer slammed into him from behind.

 

His car's gas tank ruptured and exploded. The fire burned so hot and so fast that it incinerated his car and the rig.

 

It was horrific and a terrible way for a 56-year-old father of two to die.

 

"I wish I could tell you that he died instantly," said Trooper Philip Dixson, a tall, no-nonsense veteran of the N.C. Highway Patrol. "But I can't."

 

Worse still is the possibility that it could have been prevented with just a little foresight on the part of state legislators and those who regulate commercial drivers.

 

The driver of the big rig, Carlos Edward Williams Jr., had twice before been convicted of driving while impaired, had beat two other DWI charges - one brought while he was operating a tractor-trailer in McDowell County in 2000 - and served time in prison in 2002 for possession of methamphetamine.

 

"I didn't know that.… That makes me sick," said Nancy Conner, Jim's widow.

 

It also begs the question: How on earth does a guy with two DWIs and a drug felony manage to hold a valid commercial driver's license?

 

Beating the system

 

Truth be told, word of Conner's death nearly was nearly lost in the news last week. The wreck - I refuse to call it an accident because that implies that nobody was at fault - got five paragraphs on Page B2.

 

It was no less tragic: An innocent man died while minding his own business.

 

According to Dixson's report, Williams didn't slow down until the very last instant. In broad daylight, he didn't see two cars stopped in front of him.

 

The posted speed limit along that stretch of U.S. 158 is 55 mph. Williams was estimated to have been traveling about 40 mph when his truck hit Conner's car. Skid marks indicate that the brakes were applied just 20 yards before impact.

 

As bad as the wreck scene was, Williams' record may be worse.

 

The convictions first: carrying a concealed weapon, possession of marijuana, Feb. 2, 1987; driving while impaired, July 23, 1992; DWI, Oct. 10, 1996; and possession of methamphetamine, March 5, 2001. Of those, Williams drew prison time (six to eight months) only for the meth conviction.

 

The ones that got away: DWI in Davie County, Jan. 6, 1994 (voluntary dismissal); possession of an open container of alcohol, Feb. 27, 1997 (prayer for judgment continued); DWI while driving a commercial vehicle, March 7, 2001 (found not guilty); and at least three speeding tickets between 2001 and 2007, all of which were reduced.

 

Is that the record of a trucker that you would want to see bearing down on you on the highway?

 

Charges pending

 

Williams has yet to be charged in connection with Conner's death. Williams agreed to a blood test. He's not talking, though, as he is lawyered up.

 

If the test shows alcohol or drugs, a murder charge will be considered.

 

"The case is under investigation," said Jim O'Neill, the assistant district attorney who will make that decision. "Let's see where it goes."

 

Now the big question: Why was Williams carrying a valid commercial driver's license? Because state law says that it is OK.

 

Before September 2005, DWIs that happened while driving a personal car couldn't be held against somebody applying for a commercial driver's license. Even now, a person has to be convicted of two DWIs within three years (or three within 10) to lose a commercial driver's license for four years. Oh, and dope charges-if they don't involve moving violations -don't count, either.

 

"If look at dates of (Williams') DWIs, they don't quite fall into that," said Marge Howell, a spokeswoman for the N.C. Department of Transportation. "If he had been convicted in 2000, it would have affected the situation. We can't revoke without a conviction."

 

Explain that to Nancy Conner.

 

Press release from US Senator Patty Murray; Thursday, April 19, 2007

HEADLINE: SEN. MURRAY EXAMINES ALARMING INCREASE IN DEATHS ON AMERICA 'S HIGHWAYS

 

DATELINE: WASHINGTON -- Today, Sen. Patty Murray (D-WA) chaired a hearing of the Senate Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations Subcommittee to examine the alarming trend of increased highway fatalities across the country. Since 2003, the number of annual fatalities has risen by over 3,000 to an estimated 43,400 deaths a year.

 

Additionally, for the first time in several years, the statistical likelihood that a citizen will be killed on our nation's highways has increased. Senator Murray challenged the assembled witnesses to come up with new ways to tackle the problem.

 

"If we are going to get back on track to reducing highway fatalities, it is clear that the old solutions are not going to be enough," said Senator Murray. "We need some new and innovative solutions. And the Federal government needs to be a partner in these solutions."

 

Today's hearing examined many of the causes for the increase in fatalities. While Senator Murray discussed problems commonly attributed to highway deaths including drunk driving, seat belt enforcement, and adherence to speed limits, she also spent substantial time focusing on ineffective compliance reviews for rogue trucking companies.

 

"We need to take a more aggressive posture in getting people to buckle up their seats belts and drink and drive responsibly, but we also need a truck safety agency that will find the problems with rogue trucking companies before fatalities occur, not after," Murray said.

 

Senator Murray illustrated the need for increased compliance reviews for trucking companies using the example of a March 19th accident that The Washington Post reported on involving a trucker who had racked up traffic citations in seven states. Read that story.

 

Read Senator Murray's opening statement here:

 

Today we will take testimony on the tragic trend of rising fatalities on our Nation's highways. Right now, an average of 119 people dies every day in motor vehicle crashes. That means that every 12 minutes, a father, a mother, a brother, a sister, or a child is stolen from the American family. Motor vehicle crashes are the leading cause of death for Americans between the ages of 3 and 33. They remain one of the top five leading causes of death for middle-aged Americans.

 

During our first Subcommittee hearing back in February, I reminded Transportation Secretary Mary Peters that, when she served as Federal Highway Administrator in 2003, she noted that there were 41,000 highway fatalities that year. She concluded that our country was facing "a National safety crisis."

 

Unfortunately since 2003 the number of annual fatalities has now risen to 43,400. The crisis has not abated. It has worsened. And even more worrisome than the raw number of people being killed on our highways is the fact that, for the first time in several years, the fatality rate - the statistical likelihood that a citizen will be killed on our highways - has actually increased. After many years of slow but steady progress, the numbers are now going in the wrong direction.

 

If we are going to get back on track to reducing highway fatalities, it is clear that the old solutions are not going to be enough. Only half of the states have enacted primary seat belt laws. And as we learned in the recent incident involving our former colleague, Governor Corzine, it is not enough just to enact primary seat belt laws. These laws, like the posted speed limits, need to be respected and enforced.

 

But there are many other factors that add to our rising fatality rate. Not enough states are taking repeat drunk drivers off the road, permanently. And not enough states are requiring safe practices by our motorcyclists. We need some new and innovative solutions. And the Federal government needs to be a partner in these solutions.

 

I am very disappointed to see that, rather than exhibiting leadership and attacking the problem, the Bush Administration appears to be retreating. A few years ago, the Bush Administration itself established the admirable goal of reducing the highway fatality rate to 1 per 100 million vehicle miles traveled by 2008. But rather than put forward bold new initiatives to reach that goal, the Bush Administration has decided instead to weaken the goal and delay it until 2011.

 

Rather than admitting defeat, the Administration should be redoubling its efforts and putting forward proposals that will truly alter the behavior of drivers, pedestrians, and even Federal enforcers and regulators.

 

Testifying before us this morning are the Administration's two principal point people on highway safety. Nicole Nason is the Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. John Hill serves as our chief truck safety official - the Administrator of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. I am also pleased that we are joined by Mark Rosenker Chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board. This is his first appearance before this Subcommittee.

 

The NTSB is probably best known for its work investigating aviation crashes, but its work in recommending safety improvements on our highways actually impacts a great many more travelers. The NTSB has no regulatory or enforcement functions. But they do carry extraordinarily important responsibilities in investigating accidents and making recommendations for safety improvements to federal and state agencies, and transportation operators to ensure a safer transportation network.

 

When the NTSB makes a recommendation to a Federal agency, we expect that Federal agency to take notice. And when the NTSB puts that recommendation on its list of most wanted safety recommendations, we expect that Federal agency to act promptly. Finally, when the NTSB determines that an agency's response to one of their "most wanted" safety recommendations is unacceptable, this Subcommittee wants answers. We want to know why the agency is turning a blind eye to the NTSB.

 

Two of the NTSB's "most wanted" safety recommendations have been directed at Mr. Hill's truck safety agency. And the NTSB has determined that Mr. Hill's response to both has been unacceptable. This morning, I want to find out why.

 

Recently, here in the Washington D.C. area, we learned the tragic results of weak and ineffective truck safety enforcement. The Washington Post recently revealed the case of a trucker who had racked up traffic citations in seven states. In one of those states, the license of the truck driver had been suspended seven times in eleven years. In fact, he was driving on a suspended license at the time that he crashed into a passenger vehicle on the Capitol Beltway, killing a 33-year-old father of two.

 

The truck driver was cited for reckless driving and he may face more serious charges as a result of that accident. That truck driver was in the employ of a trucking company called BK Trucking. Prior to the accident, BK Trucking firm was already on the watch list for the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration because of an unusually high number of accidents and deficient inspections.

 

A little more than three weeks before the beltway accident, the FMCSA did a full scale compliance review on BK trucking. They found a few problems, mostly with log books but otherwise found no violations that the agency described as "critical" or "acute."

 

That was before the fatal accident. Three days after this awful tragedy, the FMCSA paid another call on BK trucking and discovered the following violations:

 

* Improper lease agreements;

* Lack of compliance with drug and alcohol testing procedures;

* Using drivers with suspended commercial drivers licenses;

* Failure to maintain records of State inspections;

* Maintaining false log books;

* Failure to turn in log books; and

* Failure to prepare driver inspection reports.

 

So just one month after the FMCSA conducted a compliance review and found only minimal problems, the agency did another compliance review and found multiple violations and wrote up fines totaling $77,000.

 

Now I don't doubt that the second compliance review conducted after the fatality was thorough. But I have serious doubts about the thoroughness of the compliance review that took place less than a month before the fatality. Are we really supposed to believe that the conditions at this trucking firm deteriorated so rapidly in 30 days? How is it that the first compliance review resulted in no violations and the second one, after the fatality revealed an endless list of problems, violations and fines?

 

I suspect the answer to those questions also explains why the National Transportation Safety Board has determined that the FMCSA's compliance review process is - in their words - "ineffective." I also suspect it explains why the NTSB has determined that the FMCSA responses to its recommendations in this area have been "unacceptable."

 

Let me be clear. Our nation's economy depends on a safe, efficient and well-capitalized trucking industry. In my home state of Washington our farmers depend on these trucks to get their agricultural products in Eastern Washington across the Cascade Mountains to the ports of Seattle and Tacoma in a safe and timely manner. And American consumers have come to expect a great variety of options as they peruse the shelves at retail outlets and supermarkets. Those goods don't get to those shelves by magic, they get there by truck.

 

But just as we need to take a more aggressive posture in getting people to buckle up their seats belts and drink and drive responsibly, we also need a truck safety agency that will find the problems with rogue trucking companies before fatalities occur, not after.

 

End.