Trucking technology

Published on: February 22, 2009

Electronic record keeping and discovery in interstate trucking

Effective 12/19/08, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration rescinded a 1997 policy in order to permit motor carriers to use electronic systems in lieu of paper logs. The change of policy recognizes the reality that most motor carriers now use some sort of technology to trace, route and manage their business. This is good in that it is difficult to falsify a GPS log and it is difficult for a motor carrier to claim it could not have known of violations of hours of service rules when it is using software designed to automatically check for such problems.

However, discovery of the electronic records may be difficult. Motor carriers are obligated to preserve electronically stored information just like paper records. But they and their lawyers are likely to claim that the information was inadvertent, that no backups exist, and that hard copies that do not include all the information are just as good. For example, software used by the motor carrier may allow for comments to be typed in a pop-up box,, but reports may be printed out without the comments that were entered.

The move toward electronic record keeping is a net positive, but it will require a more sophisticated approach to discovery in the litigation of serious trucking accident cases.

Those of us who handle serious trucking accident cases are gearing up for a much tougher approach to electronic discovery.
Continue reading →

Published on: February 9, 2009

NTSB suggests requiring fatigue monitoring technology in trucking

By Ken Shigley

The National Transportation Safety Board has recommended that the DOT explore requiring fatigue monitoring systems. Those could include included lane departure warning systems, driver monitoring systems such as PERCLOS (which measures the rate of eyelid closure), and electronic onboard recorders. In addition, the NTSB spokesman said that “Both active braking and ESC technologies represent opportunities for significant enhancement of CWSs’ capabilities to prevent (or mitigate) commercial vehicle accidents.”
Continue reading →

Published on: January 1, 2009

Two cement mixer truck rollovers highlight special handling characteristics

By Ken Shigley

Two cement mixer trucks rolled over yesterday morning in Mississippi. This highlights something I have learned as a Georgia trucking accident attorney.

In loaded cement mixer trucks the center of gravity is high and constantly shifting. Road tests described in standard truck driver training materials in the ready-mix concrete industry graphically describe the handling characteristics. It is well known in the industry, and covered in training videos and Power Point presentations, that a loaded cement mixer truck will tip up on two wheels when making a ninety degree turn on level pavement at 12 miles per hour, and will roll over at 16 miles per hour.

Recently I handled a case in which cement mixer truck in Georgia rolled over when making a turn in a level intersection, landing on a family vehicle. The cement truck driver had just obtained his CDL a couple of month earlier, and his training on cement mixer truck driving consisted of showing him how to work the mixer controls. At his deposition, I showed the driver the standard industry training video. He swore that he had never been trained on any of that, and if he had been trained the accident and injury would not have occurred.

The cement company admitted responsibility for its driver and filed a motion to exclude to independent negligence claims against the corporation for its negligent hiring, training, entrustment and supervision. However, when we responded to their motion with a brief showing that under the Georgia tort reform legislation that requires apportionment of damages between the employer and driver, they soon agreed to a fair settlement in mediation.
Continue reading →

Published on: December 3, 2008

The future of intellligent transportation systems

By Ken Shigley

While I make my living and support my family as a trial lawyer representing people badly in hurt in truck and bus crashes — and the surviivors of those who do not survive — the ultimate objective is to improve safety and reduce the incidence of future injuries and deaths.

While much of safety management in trucking is just common sense and effective management, technology can also provide tools to improve safety. Last month in New York, the 15th World Congress on Intelligent Transportation Systems exhibited several new advances in trucking safety technology. Of course, it will help improve safety only if it is purchased and used.

* Integrated corridor management would use “congestion pricing” to address regional traffic problems. Congestion pricing is the practice of charging more to use a roadway, bridge or tunnel during periods of the heaviest use in order to ease traffic.

* Integrated Vehicle-Based Safety Systems (IVBSS) combines lane departure warning, forward collision warning and blind-spot monitoring into a single system, eliminating distracting and competing warning signals for drivers. Volvo demonstrated a version of VBSS that uses active steering control to keep the vehicle in its lane and to help avoid blind-side collisions in lane changes, as well as providing object detection alerts and rollover warning. The Nissan version of VBSS includes active braking tied to forward and rearward object detection as well as a variety of warning systems based on two-way “cooperative” communications between the vehicle, roadside signals and other nearby vehicles.

* “Trusted Truck” technology would allow heavy vehicles to bypass roadside inspections by use of truck sensors and real-time two-way wireless communications to provide roadside officers with vehicle safety information as the truck approaches the inspection site. An onboard screen then instructs the driver to either bypass the inspection if there are no problems or to pull over. The Volvo system also automatically alerts fleet management if the truck is stopped, providing data on the detected vehicle problems.

* Advanced electronic freight management systems.

* Initiatives to increase truck-parking access.
Continue reading →

Published on: September 18, 2008

NTSB urges stronger enforcement of truck driver rest period rules

By Ken Shigley

As a lawyer handling catastrophic trucking accidents, I have repeatedly seen the deadly effects of driver fatigue as truckers are pushed beyond their physical limits by trucking companies and shippers.

Now the National Transportation Safety Board on Tuesday recommended that trucking companies and the government place increased emphasis on making sure truck drivers follow regulations governing proper rest. Additionally, officials at the NTSB recommended that the government should investigate the use of alarms and other devices to monitor drivers’ alertness. Experts estimate that fatigue is responsible for one in eight large-truck crashes.

The NTSB also called upon the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to step up enforcement of trucking companies, making sure their record-keeping is up to date and drivers are being given adequate time to rest.

Investigators also debated the use of technology designed to warn of impending collisions and automatically engage the brakes. They discussed concerns that automatic braking could interfere with the stability of large rigs, so the board recommended that the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration study the technology and mandate its use if it proves effective.
Continue reading →

Published on: July 7, 2008

Driver Fatigue Monitor seeks to cut fatigue-related crashes

By Ken Shigley

As a Georgia trucking safety trial lawyer based in Atlanta, I often see the tragic effects of fatigue among truck drivers who are pushed by trucking companies and shippers to perform beyond the normal limits of human capability.

On the other side of the Atlantic, SafeDrive Europe has released its Driver Fatigue Monitor, which is intended to cut the number of fatigue-related wrecks by alerting drivers to the first sign of drowsiness. The Driver Fatigue Monitor was developed by sleep expert Dr. Richard Grace alongside the Carnegie Mellon Institute in Pennsylvania and is already available in the US. According to a report in Logistics Manager, the device measures drowsiness by checking the per cent of eye closure through a real time camera and computer. If a driver appears to be reaching a dangerously fatigued state the monitor is designed to notify them through audible and visible indicators, giving them enough time to pull over safely.

It can be permanently installed into a vehicle or is available as a portable version, which plugs into the cigarette lighter.
Continue reading →

Published on: June 19, 2008

Trucking accidents may be documented by DriveCam — if they save the video

By Ken Shigley

As a trucking accident trial lawyer in Georgia, frequently lecturing at trucking litigation seminars around the country, I try to keep up with the latest in trucking safety technology. One recent development is DriveCam, about which my friend Morgan Adams in Tennessee recently wrote on his blog.

DriveCam utilizes a camera mounted in a truck cab that will retain the last few seconds of video of both the driver and what is in front of the truck before and after an emergency event like hard braking, swerving, collision, etc. The information is transmitted automatically to DriveCam headquarters for analysis and then to the truck or bus company. Employers can review data, even when there is not an accident, to analyze what led to the emergency situation. DriveCam thus enables trucking company safety directors to recognize safe drivers and penalize dangerous drivers.

If DriveCam data exists, it can potentially prove or disprove the cause of a collision, eliminating a lot of the swearing contests we encounter now. Some truck drivers may feel that Big Brother is riding with them, but at the same time some may be saved from liability or prosecution by the DriveCam videos. Of course, knowing how many trucking companies destroy records that are not favorable to them, I suspect that the only DriveCam videos we ever get to see will be those that exonerate the driver. If the video shows the driver was falling asleep, I suspect we will either never learn that DriveCam was in the cab or will get a response that, golly, it just wasn’t working that day.
Continue reading →