1. law, govt and politics
2. law enforcement
3. police

CONTACT: Beth Weaver, 301-814-4088
[email protected]
Family Members of Truck Crash Victims, Law Enforcement, Labor and Safety Groups
Urge Congress to Stop Pandering to Trucking Interests
and Start Paying Attention to Public Safety and Public Opinion
House Appropriations Committee Rejects Amendment to Strip Anti-Truck Safety Riders from Bill
By a Vote of 31-20
Consumer Warning:
Dangerous Road Conditions Ahead if Special Interest “Riders” in House Transportation Spending Bill Become Law
WASHINGTON, DC (Wednesday, May 13, 2015) – Today, families who have had loved ones killed in
large truck crashes joined law enforcement, labor and safety groups to urge Congress to put public safety
before corporate profits. Despite alarming increases in truck crash deaths and injuries since 2009, some
members of Congress are pushing a legislative overhaul of lifesaving truck safety laws and rules in the
Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Transportation, House and Urban Development (THUD) appropriations bill at the
request of influential industry executives. So-called “riders” in the bill will force every state to allow
extra-long trucks pulling twin 33 foot tractor trailers throughout the country, dramatically increase
working and driving hours for truck drivers to 82 hours a week, allow exemptions to federal truck size
and weight laws, and stop a public rulemaking reviewing minimum insurance coverage for trucks and
passenger carrying buses.
“Truck crash fatalities have gone up by 17% and injuries by 28% over the last four years. Every year an
average of 4,000 people needlessly die in truck crashes and 100,000 more are injured. Commercial motor
vehicle crashes have a price tag of $99 billion annually. The economic and emotional costs to families
and our economy are staggering. Yet, instead of advancing public safety, proposals are now being
considered in Congress advancing industry profits.” said Jackie Gillan, President of Advocates for
Highway and Auto Safety. “If these industry giveaways are enacted into law there will be oversized and
overweight trucks being driven by overworked truckers throughout the country. Public opinion polls are
clear and convincing. The public does not support any of these changes by large majorities.”
The FedEx Double 33s proposal will result in trucks at least 84 feet long, the height of an 8-story office
building, often traveling at high speeds on all highways and local roads and streets throughout the
country. Lisa Shrum of Fayette, Missouri, whose mother and stepfather were killed in a crash involving a
FedEx double trailer truck said, “I am here today to honor my loving mom and Randy. But, I am also here
to speak out against the current legislation under consideration in Congress. By furthering the legislative
agenda of special trucking interests – by allowing trucks to become even longer and heavier, not to
mention driven by tired truckers – our highways will become even more dangerous, even more lethal.”
“The Teamsters don’t support longer, heavier trucks, even if it meant more trucks on the road, and
potentially more drivers and Teamster members,” said LaMont Byrd, Director, International Brotherhood
of Teamsters Safety & Health Department. “It’s not about jobs, it’s about safety. It’s about ensuring as
safe a workplace for our members who drive for a living as anyone working a job on a factory floor.”
Also in the THUD bill is the “Tired Truckers” provision which was pushed through by Sen. Susan Collins
(R-ME) in last year’s spending bill. The temporary suspension of the “weekend off” for truck drivers
would essentially become permanent, despite clear and compelling evidence that truck driver fatigue is a
serious safety problem.
“As you may know, this is National Police Week. Officers from around the country will honor fellow
officers lost in the line of duty during the previous year. The names of fallen officers added to the
National Law Enforcement Officers Memorial walls include many who have lost their lives in traffic
related incidents. In the past ten years that number is close to 600 law enforcement officers,” said Captain
Robert Kneer of the Fair Lawn New Jersey Police Department. “I urge Congress to stop these truck safety
rollbacks. We owe it to the memory of those officers who gave the supreme sacrifice and the thousands
of police officers who risk their lives every day enforcing traffic safety laws in high-speed and dangerous
situations to keep our streets and roads safe for everyone.”
Daphne Izer, Founder of Parents Against Tired Truckers (PATT), who lost her son Jeff in a crash caused
by a Walmart driver who fell asleep at the wheel said, “Truck drivers are being pushed beyond physical
and mental limits to work up to 82 hours a week, more than double the average work week of most
Americans. And, truck crash fatalities are on the rise. Yet, ignoring these sobering facts, Congress seems
dead-set on putting more tired truckers on the road. This will jeopardize their lives and the lives of our
family members.”
The THUD bill includes exemptions from federal truck size and weight limits for Idaho and Kansas. If
passed, trucks up to 129,000 pounds – more than 60% above the current federal limit – will be sharing the
road with Idahoans throughout the state. Additionally, Kansas motorists, motorcyclists, pedestrians and
bicyclists will be on the road with trucks that are potentially more than 100 feet long. These changes pose
serious risks to the citizens, infrastructure, and budgets of the state and should not be pushed through a
backdoor funding process in the United States Congress.
“Congress should be taking action to improve, not worsen, our infrastructure,” said Officer Robert Mills
of the Fort Worth, Texas Police Department. “It shouldn’t take a disaster like the bridge collapses in
Minneapolis and Washington State to spur action. Yet, despite those clear warning signs and our
increasingly crumbling infrastructure, Congress is still pushing for longer and heavier trucks. While we
don’t know where the next disaster will happen, we do know that adding more length and more weight
leads to more damage and more devastation.
“I cannot remember in the last 25 years a more industry coordinated and comprehensive attack on motor
carrier safety,” said Joan Claybrook, Chair of Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways. “We urge
Congress to reject this bill and ask Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx to recommend that
President Obama veto any spending bill that includes anti-safety measures and will cause more deaths and
injuries on our streets and roads. Families will be paying with their lives and their wallets if trucking
interests are successful.”
###
Statement of Captain Robert Kneer
Captain, Fair Lawn, New Jersey Police Department
Washington, D.C.
May 13, 2015
Good afternoon.
I am Captain Robert Kneer. I am a 42 year veteran of the Fair Lawn, New Jersey Police Department, and
Commander of the New Jersey State Honor Guard. In my line of duty, I have worked many crash scenes, and
seen first-hand the catastrophic destruction that occurs when an 80,000 pound truck collides with a passenger
car. The car occupants are almost always the losers.
Truck driver fatigue is a known killer. And yet, as I speak to you, members of Congress are poised to make
this problem worse by forcing truck drivers to work and drive even longer hours and take away their weekend
off. Congress is also prepared to increase the size and weight of trucks on our roadways. If Congress does not
make an immediate course change, more families will be put in the path of bigger, heavier trucks being driven
by fatigued and tired truck drivers.
As you know, this is National Police Week. Officers from around the country will honor fellow officers lost in
the line of duty during the previous year. The names of fallen officers added to the National Law Enforcement
Officers Memorial walls include many who have lost their lives in traffic related incidents. In the past ten years
that number is close to 600 law enforcement officers.
I urge Congress to stop these truck safety rollbacks. We owe it to the memory of those officers who gave the
supreme sacrifice and the thousands of police officers who risk their lives every day enforcing traffic safety
laws in high-speed and dangerous situations to keep our streets and roads safe for everyone. And we owe it to
the 4,000 people who are killed every year in preventable truck crashes. The needless fatalities must stop and
this assault on truck safety must be defeated.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF LISA SHRUM
May 13, 2015
Good afternoon. My name is Lisa Shrum. I never imagined I would be here today in the United
States Senate, so far from my hometown of Fayette, Missouri. But I'm here to share my story,
one I wouldn't wish on any family.
This past Sunday was Mother’s Day, but I wasn’t able to tell my mom how much I loved her and
how much she meant to me. My mother, Virginia, died on October 10, 2006, in a devastating
crash that also killed her husband, Randy. They were driving home to Pleasant Hill, Missouri
after dropping off a car in Fayette for my younger brother. They were traveling on Interstate 70
shortly after 11 p.m. Driving conditions were not ideal. But then, they rarely are when you’re on
a heavily traveled highway with cars and big trucks moving at high speeds. They had just crested
a hill. There was a crash ahead on the road and visibility was poor. In addition, a FedEx double
trailer truck had swerved into the left hand shoulder to avoid the upcoming crash.
Because of the sheer length of the FedEx truck’s two trailers, the back end of the second trailer
extended into the passing lane of traffic. Mom’s vehicle hit the double trailer sticking out into the
lane ahead of her, spun out, and was then struck by another tractor trailer which sliced her
vehicle in half.
Both my mom and Randy were killed. There was a third fatality that day, a young father and
husband, and ten people injured in this multi-vehicle crash. When I think about the crash and
hear about lobbying efforts by FedEx and others to make trucks even longer and heavier, I cringe.
I cringe to think about how much worse it would have been, how many more cars would have
been hit, and how many more people would have been killed if longer, heavier trucks were
involved.
That day a void was created in my life and my family’s life that can never be filled. My brothers
and I lost our mom and step-dad. My son, Malakai, who was only 18 months old at the time, will
never know his grandmother and Randy except in photos. Mom was an avid horse enthusiast.
Her grandson will never get to enjoy with her the pony ride she was planning for him. My
brother Harrison, who was 18 at the time of the crash, missed getting to dance with his mom at
his wedding. He has longed for her advice on raising his baby girl, Hailee, who will never meet
her grandmother.
Each milestone that passes – every Mother’s Day, every birthday, every holiday, and every
single day, good and bad – reminds me that our mother was tragically taken from us. It is a void
that will never be filled.
I am here today to honor my loving mom and Randy. But, I am also here to speak out against the
current legislation under consideration in Congress. By furthering the legislative agenda of the
trucking interests – by allowing trucks to become even longer and heavier, not to mention driven
by tired truckers – our highways will become even more dangerous, even more lethal.
The crash that killed Mom and Randy was horrific. There is no safety technology that could have
protected them from a twin trailer. The result on their pickup, as you can see in these photos, was
complete obliteration. It's hard to recognize what the vehicle must have looked like before the
crash. Only Randy's “Army Dad” license plate is still discernible. Even in death, he was able to
tell his son Jesse how proud he was of him.
Everyone here thinks – “it can’t happen to me.” But trust me, it does happen to families every
day. And it will only worsen, with increased frequency and enhanced tragedy, if FedEx and
others have their way.
I am a middle school math teacher and I want to help FedEx and their supporters in Congress
with some numbers. Over the last two years, there have been approximately 90 people killed and
more than 1,250 injured in FedEx truck crashes. When we look at all accidents involving large
trucks, the numbers are even worse. Every year 4,000 people are needlessly killed and 100,000
more are injured on our nation’s highways in crashes involving large trucks. 96% of people
killed in a crash involving a large truck and a car are in the passenger vehicle. Double trailer
trucks have an 11% higher fatal crash rate than single trailer trucks.
Is it really so important that FedEx be allowed to carry more packages when it means more
oversized trucks on our streets and highways? Is it really so important for FedEx and other
trucking companies to increase their profits? Congress, I plead with you, do not put profits ahead
of public safety. I know what’s important and I pray Congress is listening. Having your mom
here for Mother’s Day and having her around to share your life is important. Letting a grandson
know the joys of having his grandma – that's important.
Allowing longer, heavier trucks will equate to more safety risks, more injuries, and more deaths.
Allowing longer, heavier trucks will mean more families, like mine, spending more holidays
without a parent, child, sibling or close friend. I urge Congress to say NO to FedEx and all of the
other trucking interests. Thank you.
LaMont Byrd, Director, International Brotherhood of Teamsters
Statement on Anti-Safety Measures in THUD Appropriations Bill
I am pleased to be here today representing our General President, Jim Hoffa. As
many of you know, he has participated in many of these press conferences
supporting the current limits on truck size and weight and the need for strong
hours-of-service regulations. And he would be here today, except for the fact
that he is attending to events relating to the Teamsters annual Unity Conference.
So I join with other safety-minded groups and these brave families who have
suffered such personal loss, to lend the Teamsters voice in denouncing the roll
back of critical safety measures through the actions of the House Appropriations
Committee and call upon the Senate to not go down this same dangerous path.
Over 600,000 of our 1.4 million members start their workday by turning a key in a
vehicle; and whether they drive a school bus, a UPS van, or an 18-wheeler, our
nation’s highways and local roads serve as their workplace.
So as a union representing those drivers, I want to address two troubling issues
that may have a profound effect on highway safety, truck size and weight and
time behind the wheel.
From a driver perspective, our roads are congested like never before. We all
know how it is to drive in heavy traffic. It wears on you. It’s stressful. It’s tiring.
Yet there are those that try to make the argument that longer and heavier trucks
will make our highways safer. But those arguments are tragically flawed.
There is no justification for increasing 28 foot double trailers to 33 feet. Unless,
that is, you take seriously a report written by the trucking industry that is pushing
for this change. These longer configurations mean greater stopping distances.
Our merging lanes aren’t designed for these longer trucks to get up to the speed
they need to safely merge, and most of our off-ramps aren’t designed for longer
heavier trucks. Just look at the scuff marks on the jersey walls.
Proponents of heavier longer trucks say that increasing lengths and weights will
mean fewer trucks on our highways. We know that’s just not true. Historically,
every time there has been an increase in truck size and weight, truck traffic has
increased.
Why does that happen? Because when you put more cargo on a truck, it
becomes cheaper to ship by truck than by rail, or some other mode of
transportation. It’s simple economics.
One might wonder why the Teamsters wouldn’t support longer heavier trucks, if it
meant more trucks on the road, and potentially more drivers and Teamster
members. Well, even if that were true, it’s not about jobs, it’s about safety. It’s
about ensuring as safe a workplace for our driver members as anyone working a
job on a factory floor.
It’s also about protecting our existing infrastructure, much of which is in serious
disrepair. Adding a sixth axle to a CMV, if it’s deployed properly, can mitigate
some of the potential damage to our highways. But 97,000 pounds on a bridge is
97,000 pounds. And with half of our bridges more than 40 years old and one in
four being structurally deficient or functionally obsolete, increasing truck weights
and lengths isn’t sound transportation policy.
And including a provision to increase double trailer size would force 39 states to
run 33 foot trailers, all while DOT is conducting a Congressionally-mandated
Truck Size and Weight Study. What sense does this make?
Now let me address driver hours-of-service and fatigue. Including provisions in
an appropriations bill that would effectively continue the suspension of the use of
the once-a-week 34 hour restart and the two 1 a.m. to 5 a.m. rest periods will
only worsen driver fatigue, as some employers will push their drivers to work over
80 hours per week – twice the normal workweek for most people.
These consecutive off duty periods are designed to give drivers the opportunity
for rest during their regular circadian rhythm, when studies show that it is most
recuperative.
And again, this is being promoted while DOT conducts a Driver Restart Study.
As we make the necessary investments and improvements in our infrastructure
to build the transportation capacity needed to compete in the global economy, we
cannot afford to let highway safety be a second thought. These end-around
attacks through the appropriations process are a bow to special interests at the
expense of everyday people who share the roads and highways with commercial
drivers.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT MILLS
Fort Worth, Texas Police Department
May 13, 2015
Good afternoon. My name is Robert Mills and I have served as a Fort Worth police officer for
almost 23 years. I have also worked for the Fort Worth Texas Commercial Vehicle Enforcement
program for 13 years, served on the executive committee for the Commercial Vehicle Safety
Alliance, and am currently a member of the Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee. Needless
to say, I have a great deal of experience with truck safety, safety violations, fatigued truck
drivers and the dangers of heavy trucks.
More importantly, I have a 5 year-old son who is the light of my life and my personal motivation
to improve safety on our roads. I am out on the highways every day and see the dangerous
conditions that motorists, truck drivers and law enforcement face.
In my home state of Texas, fifty-six percent of our major roadways are in poor, mediocre, or fair
condition and almost a fifth of our bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.
Congress should be taking action to improve, not worsen, our infrastructure. It shouldn’t take a
disaster like the bridge collapses in Minneapolis and Washington State to spur action. Yet,
despite those clear warning signs and our increasingly crumbling infrastructure, Congress is still
pushing for longer and heavier trucks. While we don’t know where the next disaster will happen,
we do know adding more length and more weight leads to more damage and more devastation.
From a safety perspective, Double 33 foot trailer trucks are a disaster. By increasing 28-foot
double-trailer trucks to 33 feet, there will be a six-foot wider turning radius. There would also be
a larger blind spot, which will be a greater hazard to pedestrians, bicyclists, motorcyclists and
motorists. Longer trucks are also a danger to law enforcement and highway workers, with the
chance of being struck increasing due to the "crack the whip" effect, in which small changes in
direction by the tractor are amplified and cause large swaying effects in the last trailer behind the
truck cab.
In the past five years, there have been more than 2,200 deaths in crashes involving a large truck
in Texas. Nationwide numbers are even more shocking – in the past five years, more than 18,000
people were killed in large truck crashes and another 500,000 more were injured. This
appropriations bill is going to result in even more preventable death and destruction. I urge
Congress to stop the tired trucker provision, the double 33s provision, the underinsured truck
provision and all increases to truck sizes and weights. Stand up for law enforcement and
American families traveling on our roads.
Thank you.
STATEMENT OF DAPHNE IZER
May 13, 2015
Good afternoon, my name is Daphne Izer and I am the founder of Parents Against Tired Truckers
(PATT). I founded PATT over 20 years ago after my son Jeff was killed in a truck crash. Jeff was in a
car with four friends, when a Walmart truck driver fell asleep at the wheel and crashed into their car. All
but one of the teenagers needlessly died. That day, October 10, 1993, five families were forever
changed.
Unfortunately, my story is not unique. Our country experiences the equivalent of a major airplane crash
every week on our roads in truck crashes. Truck drivers are being pushed beyond physical and mental
limits to work up to 82 hours a week, more than double the average work week. And, truck crash
fatalities are on the rise. Yet, ignoring these sobering facts, Congress seems dead-set on putting more
tired truckers on the road. This will jeopardize their lives and the lives of our family members.
Last year, I made this same trip to Washington from my hometown of Lisbon, Maine to urge my own
Senator, Susan Collins, to stop her egregious efforts to take away truck drivers “weekend off.” My pleas
were met by deaf ears and the trucking industry notched another deadly victory in their lobbying efforts.
Now, just six months later, the House funding bill essentially continues Senator Collins’s deadly tired
trucker experiment.
I am not alone in opposing this deadly safety rollback. This issue received widespread public and media
attention last summer when a limousine bus carrying comedian Tracy Morgan was hit by a Walmart
truck driver who had fallen asleep behind the wheel. James McNair, a fellow comedian, was killed and
Mr. Morgan was seriously injured. There were countless editorials all across the country highlighting the
problem of tired truck driver fatigue and opposing what Sen. Collins and the trucking industry are doing.
Everyday people are needlessly dying on our roads in large truck crashes and many of them involve
tired truckers. In fact, about 4,000 people are killed every year. Most are not celebrities whose deaths
receive a lot of media coverage. They are parents who left home to go to work, or teens going on a
college visit like those killed and injured in the Orland, California FedEx crash, or student nurses
returning from a fun weekend away like those recently killed in Georgia, or maybe a child who went out
with some friends for an autumn hay ride like my son, Jeff, and never made it home. This will happen
over and over again until the trucking industry faces up to the problem and they advance responsible
solutions instead of seeking repeal of important safety rules.
The public understands this issue and is very concerned. Last October a poll was conducted that showed
80% of Americans don’t want Congress to increase the working and driving hours of truck drivers. Yet,
despite that strong statement, Congress is moving ahead with a bill to allow overtired and overworked
truckers behind the wheel of overlong and overweight trucks. This has to be stopped. I urge Senator
Collins, the members of the House and Senate Appropriations Committees and every Member of
Congress to put families before the corporate profits of the trucking industry.
Thank you.
Statement of Joan Claybrook, Chair
and Former Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
Press Conference on the Trucking Industry Drive to Increase the Dangers of Big Trucks
May 13, 2015
Good afternoon, I am Joan Claybrook, Chair of Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways and former
Administrator of the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. We are here today to talk about an
aggressive and astounding assault on truck safety being pushed at the highest levels in the trucking industry,
by CEOs such as Fred Smith of Federal Express. Today is “Pay Day” for FedEx and other trucking interests.
Unfortunately, American families will be paying with their lives and their wallets if this bill is passed.
Tacking special interest riders onto a must-pass appropriations bill without any public review or input is
straight out of the corporate lobbyists’ playbook. I thought Congress eliminated so-called “earmarks” but it
seems to have survived only for rich corporations trying to overturn commonsense safety laws. Not one of
these “earmarks” would survive public scrutiny.
These alarming rollbacks on truck size and weights, truck driver hours, and minimum truck crash insurance
levels have not been subject to a single congressional hearing, agency review with public input or safety
analysis of the impacts on crashes, deaths and injuries. The only document being used to foist double 33 foot
trailers on American families was paid for by FedEx and other trucking interests. And, FedEx and other supporters
will profit big time if this change is allowed to become law. The industry study ignores reality and estimates the
benefits that will come from these dangerous rigs on the premise that larger trucks will result in fewer trucks on the
road. This is a faulty and phony hypothesis which history has never supported. This industry-sponsored study is
nothing but corporate junk science.
This bill not only skirts the regular congressional process, it also ignores the views of states. States are going
to be forced to allow double 33 foot tractor trailers even if they don’t want them. And, right now 39 states
have laws saying they don’t want them. But Watch Out! because a truck pulling two trailers the length of an
eight-story office building is going to be driving next to you and your family at 65, 70 or even 75 miles an
hour. Or, you may encounter one on winding, narrow two-lane roads or on crowded streets during your rush
hour commute.
Last March, an article on the multi-billion dollar profits of FedEx included extensive quotes from Mr. Smith
about congressional consideration of his plan to force states to allow Double 33s and the active lobbying of
FedEx. He claims, incorrectly, that the twin-trailer proposal enjoys widespread support across the transport
spectrum. But he does not mention that the public - who uses and pays for our roads – strongly oppose his
plan. So do truck drivers - who are behind the wheel of these oversized rigs on highways and local roads.
And so do some trucking companies. And so do railroad companies. And so do law enforcement officials
who must deal with the consequences on the highway, and inform families about the loss of their loved ones.
It doesn’t matter to the Congressional sponsors of these anti-safety provisions what the public wants or what
the states want. The only thing that matters to them is what FedEx and other trucking interests want and how
to deliver for them. The Mississippi Transportation Commission recently wrote a letter to Mississippi Senator
Thad Cochran, Chair of the Appropriations Committee, stating they don’t want Double 33s because it would
“endanger motorists, worsen our crumbling roads and increase the fiscal burden shouldered by Mississippi
taxpayers.”
Make no mistake, the FedEx proposal is all about increasing their profits at the expense of public safety.
Yet, the rollbacks don’t stop there. There are several other anti-safety earmarks slipped into the bill. Idaho
trucks will be allowed to weigh up to 129,000 pounds – a more than 60% increase from current federal limits.
Kansas trucks will be as long as 100 feet – dwarfing not only passenger cars, but even other trucks.
And, tired truckers will continue to be on our roads. The bill essentially extends and expands the backdoor
amendment demanded by Senator Susan Collins of Maine late last year to increase the weekly working and
driving hours of a truck driver to 82 hours.
And, last but not least, the bill stops an open and public government rulemaking. Insurance minimums have
not been increased in over 30 years for truck and passenger-carrying buses. Current requirements are grossly
inadequate to cover the massive, often financially devastating, costs of serious truck crashes. Rather than allow
all stakeholders to participate in the rulemaking, the trucking industry wants to cut out the public by stopping
any agency action.
I cannot remember in the last 25 years a more industry coordinated and comprehensive attack on motor carrier
safety. We urge Congress to reject this bill and ask Secretary of Transportation Anthony Foxx to recommend
that President Obama veto any spending bill that includes anti-safety measures and will cause more deaths and
injuries on our streets and roads. Families will be paying with their lives and their wallets if trucking
interests are successful.
Thank you.
Stop the Assault on Truck Safety – Support the Price Amendment
Truck crash victims and survivors, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety,
AAA, International Brotherhood of Teamsters, American Public Health Association,
SMART, American Short Line and Regional Railroad Association,
Consumer Federation of America, Railway Supply Institute,
Truck Safety Coalition, Road Safe America, Parents Against Tired Truckers,
Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways, The John Lindsay Foundation,
KidsAndCars.org, and Trauma Foundation Support the Price Amendment
Here are some numbers to consider:
Safety:
 4,000 people killed, 100,000 more injured in truck
crashes every year on average.
 Commercial motor vehicle crashes cost our nation $99
billion annually.
 96% of the fatalities are occupants of the passenger
vehicle in fatal two-vehicle crashes between a large
truck and a passenger motor vehicle.
 17% increase in fatalities and 28% increase in the
number of people injured in large truck crashes over the
last four years.
 76% - the number of respondents in a recent public
opinion survey opposed to longer and heavier trucks.
 80% - the number of respondents in a recent public
opinion poll opposed to increasing truck driver working
and driving hours.
Trucking Industry:
 At least 84 feet – the length of a double tractor trailer
if the FedEx special interest provision to increase
trailer length from 28 to 33 feet passes.
 At least 97,000 pounds – the weight of trucks if the
national limit is lifted or states continue to receive
special interest exemptions. In the current version of
the THUD bill, Idaho can allow trucks up to 129,000
pounds and Kansas would potentially be operating
tractor trailers up to 100 feet or more in length.
 82 hours – the work week for truck drivers if the
restart rules for hours of service are permanently
rolled back.
 2 nights of sleep each week taken away from truck
drivers after long working and driving hours.
Don’t let the trucking industry stack the numbers against public safety
On April 29, the House Appropriations Subcommittee on Transportation, Housing and Urban Development
(THUD) passed out their version of the Fiscal Year 2016 funding bill for the U.S. Department of Transportation.
The bill was marked-up by the full Committee on May 13. Rep. David Price (D-NC) offered an amendment to
strike all of the anti-truck safety provisions included in the bill which are a massive assault on truck safety.
We urge you to oppose the following provisions:
 NO to FedEx Double 33’ tractor trailers on federal and local roads (House THUD bill Sec. 125).
The anti- safety, pro-industry plan will overturn state laws and bulldoze states to accept trucks
that are at least 84 feet long on federal, state and local roads.


If truck lengths are increased from 28 to 33 feet, the laws of 39 states (AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, CT,
DE, GA, HI, IL, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MI, MN, MS, MO, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH,
OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI) which currently prohibit longer trailers
may be overturned. States where double 33s are prohibited and states where they are not running
will be pressured to allow these longer trucks on their roads which are not equipped to
accommodate them.
Longer double-trailer trucks will make passing even more dangerous than it already is. A doubletrailer truck using 33-foot trailers would be at least 84 feet long, the height of an 8-story office
building, and a triple-trailer truck would be at least 120 feet long, equivalent to a 12-story
building. These longer trucks would dwarf the size of an average car and are the equivalent of 5 to
8 passenger cars in length.

Increasing lengths will set back intermodal efficiency. At present, intermodal rail cars are
equipped to carry six, 28-foot trailers end to end. If trailers are lengthened to 33 feet, rail cars
would only be able to carry two trailers per trip. This is half the number of trailers and a 41%
reduction in intermodal efficiency.
 NO nationwide truck size and weight increases raising the federal 80,000 lbs. limit to 97,000 lbs.
and more, or granting weight or length exemptions for specific states such as Idaho and Kansas
(House THUD bill Secs. 124 and 126) or specific industries. The provision would allow Idaho to
operate trucks up to 129,000 pounds and Kansas to operate trucks potentially more than 100
feet long.



By overwhelming margins in numerous public opinion polls over the last 20 years, the American
public consistently and convincingly rejects sharing the road with bigger, heavier and longer
trucks. The most recent poll in January 2015 by Harper Polling revealed that 76% of respondents
oppose longer and heavier trucks on the highways and 79% are very or somewhat convinced that
heavier and longer trucks will lead to more braking problems and longer stopping distances,
causing an increase in the number of crashes involving trucks.
Special interest truck size and weight exemptions are essentially “earmarks” for states and
“unfunded mandates” imposed on all American taxpayers who bear the cost of federally-financed
infrastructure damage and repairs.
When special interest or state exemptions are passed, there is pressure on neighboring states to
push for similar exemptions. Each special exemption is eating away at the comprehensive federal
limit and endangering motorists.
 NO to extending “Collins Amendment” tucked into the 2015 overall federal spending bill last
December that dramatically increases the working and driving hours of truck drivers up to 82
hours a week and takes away their “weekend” off, resulting in more tired truckers and
jeopardizing safety (House THUD bill Sec. 132).




A provision added to the Cromnibus bill (Pub. L. 113-235) in December 2014 rolled back
important safety reforms to hours of service (HOS) rules which were implemented by the DOT in
July 2013 after a lengthy rulemaking process which considered 21,000 formal public comments,
thorough and compelling scientific research, extensive stakeholder input, as well as three lawsuits.
This major change will significantly increase working and driving hours for truck drivers, from 70
hours to 82 hours. Essentially, this provision takes away the two-night off “weekend” for truck
drivers.
With this provision, the HOS rule reverts to the Bush Administration rule in effect when a 2006
survey of truck drivers found an alarming 65% of truck drivers reported they had often or
sometimes felt drowsy while driving and nearly half admitted to falling asleep while driving in the
previous year.
The assertion that the 34-hour rest period put trucks on the road at times when children are going
to school is false. The 34-hour rest period did not restrict a driver from driving at night. In fact, the
rule placed no restrictions whatsoever on when a truck driver must drive.
 NO to a prohibition on a rulemaking going on right now at the U.S. Department of
Transportation to determine whether or not motor carriers, including trucks and buses, are
required to have sufficient insurance coverage which has not been reviewed and revised since
1985 (House THUD bill Sec. 134).
 YES to putting the safety of American families and truck drivers first and not the economic
agenda of the special trucking interests.
Large Trucks
3,964 people were killed and 95,000 people were injured in crashes involving large trucks in 2013.1
In the previous 10 years (2004-2013), more than 43,000 people were killed and nearly one million
were injured in crashes involving large trucks.2 Every year on average, over 4,000 people are killed
and nearly 100,000 are injured in large truck crashes.3 Of those killed in 2013, 71 percent were
occupants of other vehicles in crashes involving large trucks, 11 percent were non-occupants
(pedestrians, pedalcyclists, etc.), and only 17 percent were occupants of large trucks.4 Large truck
crash fatalities increased again from 2012 to 2013.5 This follows a 9 percent increase in 2010, a 3
percent increase in 2011 and a 4 percent in 2012, for a combined increase in large truck involved
crash fatalities of 17 percent since 2009, while the overall number of traffic fatalities for all
motor vehicles declined by 3 percent over that same time.6 Similarly, the number of people injured
in large truck involved crashes increased by 28 percent since 2009 while the total number of people
injured in all traffic crashes only increased by 4 percent.7
LARGE TRUCK SAFETY FACTS

Annual truck crash fatalities are equivalent to a major airplane crash every other week of the
year.

The annual cost to society from crashes involving commercial motor vehicles is estimated to
be over $99 billion.8

A January 2015 nationwide survey conducted by Harper Polling found that 76 percent of
respondents oppose longer and heavier trucks9. Similarly, a May 2013 public opinion poll by
Lake Research Partners found that 68 percent of Americans oppose heavier trucks and 88
percent of Americans do not want to pay higher taxes for the damage caused by heavier
trucks.10

Tractor-trailers moving at 60 mph are required to stop in 310 feet – the length of a football
field – once the brakes are applied.11 Actual stopping distances are often much longer due to
driver response time before braking and the common problem that truck brakes are often not
in top working condition.
o In 2014, violations related to tires and/or brakes accounted for 5 of the top 10 most
common vehicle out-of-service (OOS) violations.12

More than one in every five trucks that is inspected is placed out of service for vehicle
deficiencies that prevent it from continuing to operate.13

In fatal two-vehicle crashes between a large truck and a passenger motor vehicle, 96 percent
of the fatalities were occupants of the passenger vehicle.14
February 2015

Overweight trucks disproportionately damage our badly deteriorated roads and bridges.
An 18,000 pound truck axle does over 3,000 times more damage to pavement than a typical
passenger vehicle axle.15

Thirty-two percent of America’s major roads are in poor or mediocre condition and 25
percent of our bridges are structurally deficient or functionally obsolete.16 The Federal
Highway Administration estimates that $146 billion in capital investment would be needed
on an annual basis over the next 20 years to significantly improve conditions and
performance.17

Increasing the weight of a heavy truck by only 10 percent increases bridge damage by 33
percent.18 The FHWA estimated that the investment backlog for bridges, to address all costbeneficial bridge needs, is $106.4 billion. The U.S. would need to increase annual funding
for bridges by 18 percent over current spending levels to eliminate the bridge backlog by
2030.19

The U.S. taxpayer unfairly subsidizes bigger, heavier trucks:
o According to the FHWA, a truck weighing over 80,000 pounds only pays between 40
and 50 percent of its cost responsibility.20
o The 2007 Transportation for Tomorrow report, mandated by Congress, confirmed
that heavy trucks were underpaying their fair share for highway use, that user fee
fairness could be achieved through weight-distance taxes, that heavy trucks should
pay an infrastructure damage fee, and that the Heavy Vehicle Use Tax—which only
contributes $1 billion annually to the Highway Trust Fund—had not been changed
since the early 1980s.21

The nation’s deteriorating surface transportation infrastructure has severe effects on
America’s economy. The American Society of Civil Engineers found the cost to the
economy from the state of the surface transportation infrastructure will be approximately
877,000 jobs lost and suppressed GDP growth of $897 billion by the year 2020. Further, the
impact on each American family’s budget would be $3,100 per year, based on lower
earnings and higher spending.22

Research and experience show that allowing bigger, heavier trucks will not result in fewer
trucks:
o Since 1982, when Congress last increased the gross vehicle weight limit, truck
registrations have increased 91 percent.23
o Increases in truck size and weights over more than 35 years have never resulted in
fewer heavier trucks on the roads.24

Heavy trucks account for 17 percent of our nation’s transportation energy use.25

Trucks with heavier gross weights require larger engines that decrease fuel economy on a
miles-per-gallon basis.26
February 2015
1
Quick Facts 2013, NHTSA, DOT HS 812 100, Dec. 2014. (Quick Facts 2013)
Traffic Safety Facts 2012: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System
and the General Estimates System, NHTSA, DOT HS 812,032 (2012 Annual Report); and Quick Facts 2013.
3
Id.
4
Quick Facts 2013.
5
Id.
6
2012 Annual Report and Quick Facts 2013.
7
Id.
8
2014 Pocket Guide to large Truck and Bus Statistics: Update October 2014, FMCSA.
9
Nationwide Survey Results, Coalition Against Bigger Trucks. Harper Polling. January 5-8, 2015.
10
Memo Re: Increasing the legal weight for trucks in the U.S., Lake Research Partners, May 7, 2013, available at
http://trucksafety.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/05/sts2013-lr-memo-tsc.pdf.
11
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 49 Part 571 Section 121: Standard No. 121 Air brake systems (FMVSS
121).
12
Roadside Inspections, Vehicle Violations: All Trucks Roadside Inspections, Vehicle Violations (2014 – Calendar),
FMCSA, available at http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SafetyProgram/spViolation.aspx?rpt=RDVV.
13
Motor Carrier Safety Progress Report (as of 9/30/14), FMCSA.
14
2012 Annual Report.
15
Equivalent Single Axle Load, Pavement Interactive, Aug. 15, 2007, available at
http://www.pavementinteractive.org/article/equivalent-single-axle-load/.
16
2013 Report Card for America’s Infrastructure, American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), available at
http://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/.
17
2013 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance, Chapter 8, FHWA 2014,
available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2013cpr/pdfs/cp2013.pdf.
18
Effect of Truck Weight on Bridge network Costs, NCHRP Report 495, National Cooperative Highway Research
Program, 2003, available at http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_495.pdf.
19
2013 Status of the Nation’s Highways, Bridges, and Transit: Conditions and Performance, Chapter 7, p. 7-30, FHWA
2014, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/2013cpr/pdfs/cp2013.pdf.
20
2000 Federal Highway User Fee Equity Ratios, Addendum to the 1997 Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study Final
Report, FHWA, May 2000, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/hcas/addendum.htm.
21
Report of the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission, Transportation for Tomorrow,
Dec. 2007, available at http://transportationfortomorrow.com/final_report/pdf/final_report.pdf.
22
American Society of Civil Engineers, “Failure to Act: The Economic Impact of Current Investment Trends in Surface
Transportation Infrastructure,” January 2013, available at
http://www.asce.org/uploadedFiles/Infrastructure/Failure_to_Act/Failure_to_Act_Report.pdf
23
2012 Annual Report.
24
Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, analysis of for-hire truck registrations in the Truck Inventory and Use
Survey / Vehicle Inventory and Use Survey, FHWA data, and Maine-Vermont Pilot Program data.
25
Transportation Energy Data Book: Edition 33, U.S. Department of Energy, Jul. 2014, available at
http://cta.ornl.gov/data/tedb33/Edition33_Full_Doc.pdf.
26
Western Uniformity Scenario Analysis: A Regional Truck Size and Weight Scenario Requested by the Western
Governor’s Association, Apr. 2004, available at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/otps/truck/wusr/wusr.pdf.
2
February 2015
DOUBLE 33s: SAFETY FACTS
Looming Troubles With Longer Doubles
Two Too-Long Trailers: “Double 33s” are a truck tractor pulling two 33-foot trailers, for a total trucktrailer-trailer combination length of at least 84 feet – the height of an 8-story building.
Americans Reject Bigger Trucks: In poll after poll Americans have made it known that they oppose bigger
trucks in any way, shape or form.
“Junk Science” Behind Double 33s: The New York Timesi recently published an article exposing that the
main study to support double 33 foot long trailers was funded by trucking industry interests – who stand to
hugely profit if this change is allowed. According to The New York Times article, a fact sheet about the
study did not reveal that FedEx commissioned the report until after the reporter investigated and inquired
about the industry’s role. This study is based on a flawed analysis and was conducted by a researcher who
has long promoted bigger trucks.
State Laws Ignored: A federal mandate for double 33 foot trailer trucks will preempt state laws in states
that do not want double 33s, overriding state legislative decisions to protect public safety. Right now, there
is a federal minimum of 28 foot trailers – states can already allow double 33s but are choosing not to. A
federal law for double 33s would be a game changer which would put unsurmountable pressure on states to
allow these overly long trucks on their roads at the expense of safety and state infrastructure spending.
Currently, as many as 39 states (AL, AK, AR, CA, CO, CT, DE, GA, HI, IL, KS, KY, LA, ME, MD, MI,
MN, MS, MO, NE, NH, NJ, NM, NY, NC, ND, OH, OK, PA, RI, SC, SD, TN, TX, VT, VA, WA, WV, WI)
may not allow the operation of these double 33-foot trucks.
Truck crashes impose a heavy safety toll: On average, 4,000 people are killed and 100,000 more are
injured in truck crashes annually.ii In a crash with a passenger vehicle and a truck, 96 percent of the fatalities
are in the car.iii Truck crashes impose enormous economic costs on society; the annual cost to society from
crashes involving commercial motor vehicles is estimated to be over $99 billion.iv
Dangers Posed by Longer Doubles
 Double-trailer trucks have a higher fatal crash rate than single-trailer trucksv—
o Double trailer trucks have a 11 percent higher fatal crash rate than single trailer trucks.
o A shift in freight transportation from single to double trailer configurations will lead to a higher safety
risk to the public.
 Longer trucks take more time to pass—
o Passing these behemoths will take longer and be more dangerous.
o Longer double 33-foot trailers add a minimum of 10 feet to the length of current 28-foot double trailers,
and are at least 84 feet long. Double 33s are equivalent in length to 5 average (16 foot) passenger cars.
Passing, especially on two-way, two lane roads will be more perilous for passenger vehicles.
o If used as a triple trailer truck, 33-foot trailers add at least 15 feet in length to the already immense size.
 Longer trailers result in more off-tracking (incursions into other lanes of traffic)—
o Longer trailers will cross into adjacent lanes and interfere with oncoming traffic as well as traffic
headed in the same direction of travel.
o Longer trailers swing into opposing lanes on curves and when making right-angle turns.vi
 Longer trucks cause serious safety problems on state and local roads—
o Longer double trailer trucks will pose an even greater danger of increasing severe crashes as they enter
and exit highways and also travel on local roads including lower-class two-way roads, with narrow
lanes, winding alignments, limited sight distances, inadequate or no shoulders, and trees and telephone
poles at the edgeline.
Burdens Imposed by Longer Doubles
 Longer doubles are premised on “Junk Science” and flawed analysis—
o The study,vii on which many of the safety and efficiency claims for double 33s are based, was produced
under contract to Federal Express (FedEx) and ConWay. It contains 3 serious flaws:
 It makes the spurious assumption that two trailers of different lengths (28 v 33 feet) would both be
filled to equal weights despite carrying different volumes of freight;
 It ignores the fact that 33 foot trailers would weigh more when empty than 28 foot trailers, which
would decrease the calculated efficiency estimates on those portions of trips when operating below
capacity or empty; and,
 It miscalculates the comparative increase in payload (volume) of 33 foot trailers as compared to 28
foot trailers.
 Longer trucks will result in less efficient intermodal freight transportation—
o Intermodal rail cars are equipped to carry six, 28-foot trailers end to end, stacked 2 high. Rail cars
would only be able to carry three 33-foot trailers per trip, which equates to only half the number of
trailers and a 41 percent reduction in intermodal efficiency.viii
o Existing rail cars cannot be modified to handle 33-foot trailers. Building new rail cars would be cost
prohibitive as there are thousands of rail cars already in the field.ix
 Congress directed the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) to study bigger trucks and their
impacts on safety and infrastructure—
o MAP-21, which passed with strong bi-partisan support, directed U.S. DOT to conduct a comprehensive
two-year truck size and weight study to provide data on crash frequency and the impact of large trucks
on safety and infrastructure.x No truck size increase should be adopted while the Congressionallymandated study is underway.
 Public opinion polls are clear, consistent – Americans strongly oppose bigger trucks—
o The American public overwhelming opposes the relentless push by some corporate trucking interests to
increase truck size and weight.xi
o Additionally, many groups and organizations are opposed to longer trucks, including: truck crash
victims and survivors; Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety; Truck Safety Coalition; Parents
Against Tired Truckers; Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways; Coalition Against Bigger Trucks;
Consumer Federation of America; The John Lindsay Foundation; Trauma Foundation; Center for Auto
Safety; KidsAndCars.org; International Brotherhood of Teamsters; SMART Transportation Division
(formerly UTU); American Short Line Railroad Association; and, Rail Supply Institute.
i
ii
iii
iv
v
vi
vii
viii
ix
x
xi
Lipton, Eric (April 1, 2015), Trucking and Rail Industries Turn State Troopers Into Unwitting Lobbyists, The New York
Times.
Traffic Safety Facts 2012: A Compilation of Motor Vehicle Crash Data from the Fatality Analysis Reporting System and the
General Estimates System, NHTSA, DOT HS 812,032 (2012 Annual Report); and Quick Facts 2013.
2012 Annual Report.
2014 Pocket Guide to Large Truck and Bus Statistics, FMCSA, May 2014.
An Analysis of Truck Size and Weight: Phase I – Safety, Multimodal Transportation & Infrastructure Consortium, November
2013; Memorandum from J. Matthews, Rahall Appalachian Transportation Institute, Sep. 29, 2014.
The U.S. Department of Transportation’s Comprehensive Truck Size and Weight Study: Volume III Scenario Analysis,
Chapter VII: Roadway Geometry, FHWA-PL-00-029 (Volume III), August 2000.
Woodrooffe, J., De Pont, J., (2011, April 11) Comparative Performance Evaluation of Proposed 33 ft Double Trailers
Combinations with Existing 28 ft Double Trailers.
Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (2014).
Id.
Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act, Pub.L. 112-141, Sec. 32801.
Harper Polling Nationwide Survey, Commissioned by CABT, January 2015.
U.S. Department of Transportation’s
Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration
Debunking the Myths on Federal Hours-of-Service (HoS) Rules for Truck Drivers
Myth:
FMCSA has applied a one-size-fits-all Hours-of-Service rule and refused to provide any flexibility or options
for relief from the regulation for the affected industries.
Fact:
As authorized by Congress, FMCSA carefully considers and collects public comments on all applications for
exemptions from federal regulations -- including the Hours-of Service rules for truck drivers. An
exemption provides a person or class of persons with relief from the regulations for up to two years, and
may be renewed. To-date, FMCSA has received four petitions for exemptions, which addressed only the
30 minute break requirement of the HoS rule. Two of the petitions have been granted: (1) for carriers of
the livestock industry, and (2) for the U.S. Departments of Defense and Energy contractors.
FMCSA has no authority to issue an exemption unless an application is first submitted to the Agency. Not
a single party or segment of the trucking industry has even applied for an exemption from the new
restrictions on the 34-hour restart.
Myth:
There was no need to update the Hours-of-Service rule.
Fact:
Nearly 4,000 people die in large truck crashes each year and driver fatigue is a leading factor. In 1995 and
again in 1999, Congress directed the U.S. Department of Transportation to address fatigue-related motor
carrier safety issues. Through a series of rulemakings, FMCSA attempted to do so but was embroiled in
litigation – from both sides -- for almost a decade, creating uncertainty for the industry.
In 2011, after years of research and public input from industry and safety advocates, FMCSA finalized the
rule that took effect on July 1, 2013 and is in place today. In August 2013, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the
District of Columbia Circuit upheld the current hours-of-service rules, after twice overturning previous
versions. The Court said, “…our decision today brings to an end much of the permanent warfare
surrounding the HOS rules.”
Myth:
The latest rule was put into place without proper research, study or public input.
Fact:
All rules implemented by the Federal government are implemented only after proper research, study, and
public input is completed. Before finalizing the current Hours-of-Service rules, FMCSA held six public
listening sessions and an online question and answer forum, and it carefully considered approximately
21,000 formal docket comments that were submitted from drivers, carriers, state law enforcement, safety
advocates and industry associations.
The 2011 final rule lists 80 sources of scientific research and data the Agency reviewed and considered,
and the Regulatory Impact Analysis cited nearly 50 scientific sources. All of this was on top of hundreds of
studies regarding fatigue and hours of work that were considered in past HOS rulemakings, including
research on the appropriateness and value of a “restart.”
Myth:
There is no scientific basis for the current, more restrictive 34-hour restart provision in the current rule.
Fact:
The FMCSA limited use of the 34-hour restart in the new rule to once every 168 hours (or one seven-day
periods) based on the extensive body of research that shows the consequences of long work hours on
driver health, and the correlation between long weekly work hours and a higher risk of sleep loss and
crashes.
The CDC’s National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health published a comprehensive study in April
2004 entitled “Overtime and Extended Work Shifts: Recent Findings on Illnesses, Injuries, and Health
Behaviors” [Caruso, C.C., et al. (2004)]. The NIOSH report documents published research on long work
hours (greater than 8 hours work per day) and an extended work week (greater than 40 hours per week).
This scientific review generally concluded that long work hours were associated with poorer health,
increased work-related and non-work related injury rates, increased illness, a greater risk of unhealthy
weight gain, cardiovascular disease, increased alcohol use, increased smoking, poorer neuropsychological
performance, reduced vigilance on task measures, reduced cognitive function, reduced overall job
performance, slower work, and decreased alertness and increased fatigue -- particularly during in the 9th
to 12th hours of work.
Subsequent to publication of the 2011 rule, a third-party field study – one of the largest ever conducted
using commercial motor vehicle drivers -- confirmed the importance of limiting use of the 34-hour restart.
The naturalistic field study to measure fatigue among commercial motor vehicle drivers concluded that
the current 34-hour restart provision requiring two periods of rest from 1-5 a.m. is more effective at
combatting fatigue than the previous version, which did not. This research was peer-reviewed to ensure
the methodology and results were solid.
In this study, researchers measured sleep, reaction time, subjective sleepiness and safe driving
performance, and found that drivers who began their work week with just one nighttime period of rest, as
compared to the two nights in the updated 34-hour restart break:
 Exhibited more lapses of attention, especially at night;
 Reported greater sleepiness, especially toward the end of their duty periods; and
 Showed increased lane deviation in the morning, afternoon and at night.
Myth:
All truck drivers are negatively impacted by the updated rule. The Senate Appropriations amendment fixes
this.
Fact:
A driver is never required to use the 34-hour restart. A 34-hour restart is only necessary if a long-haul
truck driver wants to work longer than 60 hours in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days. Less than 15 percent of
long-haul truck drivers -- those who work the most extreme schedules -- are even impacted by the current
rule, according to the Regulatory Impact Analysis for the 2011 Hours of Service rule. Those averaging 70
hours per week or less are not affected by the changes to the 34-hour restart because they would never
work the number of hours that would require them to use the restart under the current rule. However,
any carrier that previously allowed or required its drivers to average up to 82 hours per week – which was
allowed under the old rule – is now required to stop this practice.
The Senate amendment would allow drivers to return to the extreme schedules allowed under the preJuly 2013 rule, when a company could require a driver to work a maximum average of up to 82 hours,
week, after week, after week.
Working long daily and weekly hours on a continuing basis is associated with cumulative fatigue, a higher
risk of crashes and a number of serious chronic health conditions in drivers.
Myth:
Crashes, injuries and fatalities were lower under the old Hours-of-Service rule.
Fact:
While the rate of fatal crashes involving large trucks per 100 million vehicle miles traveled decreased each
year from 2005 through 2009, it rose, along with increased demand for freight shipping, from 2009
through 2012.
Myth:
The Hours-of-Service rule is hurting a trucker’s ability to make money and trucking companies’ bottom
lines.
Fact:
This rule has been in place almost a full year; a year in which the industry has seen higher profitability
than any year since 2009. Only those drivers who were working more than 70 hours per week may be
affected by having their work limited to an average of 70 hours per week, which is still nearly double the
national standard of a 40-hour work week.
Myth:
The Hours-of-Service rule discriminates against nighttime drivers and forcing them to be on the road
during the day and prime rush hours.
Fact:
There is no body of evidence to support this claim, and supply chain professionals demand their trucking
suppliers to make full use of the 24-hour day to move freight throughout our country. Many of the regular
nighttime drivers are in the less-than-truckload segment and already take full weekends off, which
automatically give them two nights off-duty.
This rule also does not prevent carriers and drivers from setting their own schedules, nor does it restrict
drivers from being on the roads during any time of the day. Only drivers who run out of time during the
work week (i.e., exceed 60 hours of work in 7 days or 70 hours in 8 days) and need to begin a new work
week as soon as possible would have to use the 34-hour restart, including two nighttime periods from 1-5
a.m. Even then, there is no requirement that such a driver “hit the road” at 5 a.m.
Carrier selection to meet shipper needs has always been a factor in the highly mobile, highly competitive
trucking industry. Finally, with less than 15 percent of long haul truck-drivers affected by the 34-hour
restart, and many with variable schedules, the impact to morning rush hour would be statistically
insignificant due to the distribution of these drivers across the country and the amount of other traffic
already on the road.
Myth:
The rule’s drive-time restrictions are forcing some drivers to shut down their trucks when they’re just a few
miles from their destinations.
Fact:
The 2011 final rule did not change the daily driving time limits or on-duty limits. Drivers have always been
required to cease operations when they run out of time. No matter what the limits on driving and work
hours are, if the motor carrier and driver plan the schedule so tightly that the driver can barely complete
the run legally, this problem will occur.
Myth:
This rule is exacerbating the driver shortage.
Fact:
As the economy strengthens and demand increases, more truckers are needed to transport freight.
However, high driver turnover is endemic in the trucking industry due to the difficult working conditions,
low wages and the demands of the job. The American Trucking Associations determined that in 2013,
driver turnover averaged 96 percent compared to 2005 when it reached an all-time high of 130 percent.
Shortages of drivers, when and where they do exist, depend more on salaries and working conditions than
on other factors.
May 12, 2015
The Honorable Harold Rogers, Chair
The Honorable Nita Lowey, Ranking Member
Committee on Appropriations
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D.C. 20515
Dear Chairman Rogers and Ranking Member Lowey:
We are writing to express our serious concerns and staunch opposition to anti-truck safety provisions included
in the Fiscal Year (FY) 2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development (THUD) Appropriations bill.
These “riders” amount to a dangerous, all-out assault on the safety of the motoring public, truck drivers,
pedestrians, bicyclists and our nation’s infrastructure. We strongly support the amendment to be offered by Rep.
David Price (D-NC) to strip these unworthy and unacceptable provisions from the bill.
The timing of this attack on safety is especially egregious considering that deaths from large truck crashes are
dramatically up while overall motor vehicle crash fatalities are down. Over the past five years alone (20092013), fatalities from large truck crashes have increased by 17% and injuries have increased by 28%. Every
year on average there are 4,000 people killed and 100,000 more injured in large truck crashes which is
equivalent to a major airplane crash every week of the year. Further, commercial motor vehicle crashes continue
to cost society $99 billion annually. By any measure, this is an alarming death toll which will be made worse if
these anti-safety provisions are enacted into law.
The bill currently contains a trucking industry “wish list” of safety repeals and rollbacks that put trucking
profits ahead of public safety. These include the FedEx proposal to overturn the law in 39 states and force
every state to allow “Double 33s” on federal and local roads. These are extra-long trucks exceeding 84 feet in
length pulling two 33 foot long trailers. Furthermore, the bill continues the “Tired Truckers” pilot program
putting truck drivers and the public at unacceptable risk of death and injury due to driver fatigue, a welldocumented and widespread problem in the trucking industry. There are also provisions allowing specific states
to increase maximum truck weights by 50% or more above current federal limits and to increase truck length up
to 100 feet or more. Additionally, the bill seeks to stop an on-going agency rulemaking concerning adequate
insurance requirements for motor carriers including trucks and passenger-carrying buses. This interference
slams the door to any public involvement in an important agency regulatory decision.
Without adoption of the Price Amendment, the THUD bill will jeopardize safety and lead to more truck crash
deaths by allowing overweight and oversized trucks to be being driven by over-tired truckers across the country.
We urge you to amend this bill and drop these industry-supported provisions which opinion polls consistently
show are strongly opposed by the public. Advancing highway safety and saving lives should be the top priority
of this Committee. The American public expects no less.
Sincerely,
Jacqueline Gillan, President
Joan Claybrook, Consumer Co-Chair
cc: Members of the House Committee on Appropriations
Parents Against Tired Truckers and Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways
May 11, 2015
The Honorable Anthony Foxx
Secretary, U.S. Department of Transportation
1200 New Jersey Ave., SE
Washington, DC 20590
Dear Secretary Foxx:
We commend your commitment to highway and auto safety as well as the U.S. Department of
Transportation’s (DOT) FY 2016 budget request to address serious safety problems facing our
nation. You have repeatedly stated in public meetings and congressional hearings that while our
nation has made important progress in reducing our highway mortality toll, 32,719 deaths in
2013 are still unacceptable. Even one death is too many for the families and friends of a loved
one needlessly killed. As family members who have lost our loved ones in large truck crashes,
and other concerned North Carolina citizens, we completely agree and support your position.
Unfortunately, while overall motor vehicle fatalities have decreased the past five years, the same
cannot be said about truck crash fatalities. In fact, there has been a serious and unabated rise in
truck crash deaths and injuries. From 2009 to 2013, there was a 17 percent increase in truck
crash deaths and a 28 percent increase in injuries. Yet, in Congress, right now, there is a fullscale assault on truck safety by special trucking interests and their allies. We haven’t seen
anything this egregious, with its blatant disregard for safety, in the past 25 years.
Rollbacks to lifesaving truck safety laws and regulations are already included in the DOT
Appropriations bill being considered on Wednesday in the House Committee on Appropriations.
We expect the trucking industry will also try to include these anti-truck safety measures in the
transportation spending bill in the U.S. Senate. If these measures are enacted into law, the public
will be sharing the roads with overweight and oversized trucks driven by overtired and
overworked truck drivers. There is no question that these provisions will result in more deaths,
more injuries, more destruction and more damage to our nation’s already crumbling
infrastructure.
Public opinion polls consistently show strong opposition to bigger, heavier, and longer trucks as
well as increasing the federal limits on the working and driving hours of truck drivers.
The overall government FY 2015 spending bill enacted by Congress last December included
several anti-truck safety provisions that became law when President Obama signed H.R. 83 (P.
L. 113-235). Most notably, an amendment sponsored by Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) allows
truck drivers to increase their weekly working and driving hours from 70 to 82, and eliminates
2020 14th Street N, Suite 710, Arlington, VA 22201. 703-294-6404. www.trucksafety.org
Parents Against Tired Truckers and Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways
their required “weekend” off. DOT’s own data shows that alarmingly high levels of truck drivers
are driving while fatigued, and nearly half have admitted to falling asleep behind the wheel.
The FY 2016 DOT House Appropriations bill currently contains a trucking industry “wish list”
of safety repeals that put trucking productivity ahead of public safety. These include the FedEx
proposal to overturn the law in 39 states and force every state to allow “Double 33s” on federal
and local roads. These are extra-long trucks exceeding 84 feet in length pulling two 33-foot-long
trailers. Furthermore, the bill continues the “Tired Truckers” pilot program putting truck drivers
and the public at unacceptable risk of death and injury due to driver fatigue, a well-documented
and widespread problem in the trucking industry. There are also provisions allowing specific
states to increase maximum truck weights by 50 percent or more above current federal limits and
to increase truck length up to 100 feet or more.
The House Appropriations bill also contains a provision that would remove the funding for the
rulemaking on minimum insurance for motor carriers. Set over 35 years ago at $750,000, the
minimum insurance for motor carriers has not been raised since. All too many times this amount
is insufficient for all the deaths, injuries and property damage a truck crash can leave in its wake.
This appropriations bill, by banning any insurance increases, only shifts responsibility for these
crashes onto the American public. When minimum insurance is not high enough to cover longterm health care for a crash survivor, or to pay for bridge repairs after a crash, taxpayers make up
the difference. That survivor will become dependent on social security and/or Medicare, instead
of the carrier who caused the damage. The bridge or infrastructure impacted will get fixed, but
only when a city or state foots the bill. We can no longer allow dangerous trucking companies to
shift responsibility for their crashes onto the backs of taxpayers.
As our nation’s top transportation official, you are in the position to carry through on your
commitment to safety and stop this assault on truck safety by recommending that the President
veto any spending bill that includes these safety repeals and rollbacks. Over the past couple years
we have witnessed in horror some tragic but preventable truck crashes. Last year, in Orland,
California, a FedEx double-trailer truck crashed into a bus transporting high school students and
chaperones on a college exploratory trip, killing 10 people and injuring at least 30 more.
According to DOT’s website, there have been nearly 2,600 FedEx crashes which have killed
almost 90 people in the past two years. Now the company is lobbying for even bigger and even
longer trucks on our streets and roads, and have publicly admitted it is to advance productivity
and not safety.
In New Jersey, comedian Tracy Morgan was seriously injured and James McNair was killed in a
truck crash involving a WalMart driver, who appears to have dozed off and did not stop in a
work zone despite traffic ahead. And recently, five Georgia nursing students were tragically
killed and two others were injured, when their vehicles were mowed down by a runaway truck.
The driver did not even slow down when approaching stopped traffic ahead.
2020 14th Street N, Suite 710, Arlington, VA 22201. 703-294-6404. www.trucksafety.org
Parents Against Tired Truckers and Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways
We hope we can count on your leadership and commitment to safety to ensure that this
Administration does not sign into law any bill that will jeopardize safety in any way. There can
be no moral or political justification for allowing a bill to become law that will result in more
crashes, more deaths, more injuries and more grieving families.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Tierney
Kernersville, NC
Board Member, CRASH
Member, Motor Carrier Safety Advisory Committee
Daughter of James Mooney
Killed in a truck crash 9/20/83
Jackie Novak
Edneyville, NC
Volunteer, Truck Safety Coalition
Mother of Charles “Chuck” Novak
Killed in a truck crash 10/24/10
Marianne and Jerry Karth
Rocky Mount, NC
Volunteers, Truck Safety Coalition
Parents of AnnaLeah and Mary Karth
Killed in a truck crash 5/4/13
Marvin and Linda Scherl
Germanton, NC
Volunteers, Truck Safety Coalition
Sherri Hager
Statesville, NC
Volunteer, Truck Safety Coalition
J. Kent Williams
Greensboro, NC
Volunteer, Truck Safety Coalition
2020 14th Street N, Suite 710, Arlington, VA 22201. 703-294-6404. www.trucksafety.org
Stutp st ffiixxixxippi
TnaNsporteuoN CoullISSIoN
Mxr
TecsRT
NORTHERN DISTRICT
Drcr Her,l
Tou KrNc
CENTRAL DISTRICT
SOUTHERN DISTzuCT
Crt,qlnt"mt
April 30,2015
The Honorable Thad Cochran
United States Senate
113 Dirksen Senate Office Building
Washington, D.C. 20510-2402
Dear Senator Cochran:
On behalf of the Mississippi Transportation Commission, we are writing in opposition to provisions we
(THUD)
understand may be included in the FY 2016 Transportation, Housing and Urban Development
bill in the Senate Committee on Appropriations that would require the State of Mississippi to allow
longer double-trailer trucks on its roads. As Chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, we
as
hope you will oppose any such provisions because these longer double-trailer trucks, often referred to
,,Twin 33s,', would endanger motorists, worsen our crumbling roads and increase the fiscal burden
shouldered by Mississippi taxpayers.
passed would require the State of Mississippi to allow longer double-trailer trucks[n
measuring gg to 91 feet in length-onto all miles of lnterstate and National Network routes statewide.
desire
other words, the State of Mississippi would have no say in the matter. If longer-truck proponents
the authority to operate longer double-trailer trucks and can demonstrate why Mississippians should
permit them, they should present their agenda to the Mississippi Transportation Commission and State
This law
if
Legislature to make their case-not to the Federal government.
we have attached a map of these National Network routes for your review so you can see how
widespread these bigger-truck operations would be. It is troubling to envision an 88-foot long doubletrailer truck hauling from Walnut to Beaumont down State Highway 15, much less the extensive cluster
of National Network routes that crisscross the State. These roads have difficulty handling the shorter
double-trailer trucks today, and will surely bear extensive damage from even longer trucks'
to
Complicating this problem is the last thing our roads need, and Mississippi taxpayers are unlikely
support an unfunded mandate from the Federal government'
posr Opprcr, Box 1850
.
|AcrsoN, Mrssrssrppr 39215- I850
. 601-359-7000 ' Fax
60I-359-7051
We also know that there are efforts in Washington to allow heavier single-trailer trucks, as well as tripletrailer trucks. The State of Mississippi is unwavering in its years-long position: We oppose changes in
the Federal law that would allow increases in truck size or weight. We face an infrastructure crisis as it
stands now,
with 3,565 structurally deficient or functionally obsolete bridges in Mississippi-over 20
percent of all bridges statewide.
We urge you to oppose any efforts to insert the so-called "Twin 33s" provision in the THUD bill, and
please oppose other efforts to increase the size or weight of trucks on Mississippi highways.
Sincerely,
4q
Dick Hall
Chairman
Mississippi Transportation Commission
Y,rA:tdT"*
Mike Tagert
Commissioner, Northem District
Mississippi Transportation Commission
T* H^f
Tom King
Commissioner, Southern District
Mississippi Transportation Commission
cc:
Cindy Mills, CABT Regional Director
Enclosure:
Mississippi National Network map