DOCSLIB.ORG

Safety Measures for Trucks: a Comparison Between EU and U.S. Jan Kapusta University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected]

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Safety Measures for Trucks: a Comparison Between EU and U.S. Jan Kapusta University of Texas at El Paso, Jan.Kapusta219@Gmail.Com University of Texas at El Paso DigitalCommons@UTEP Open Access Theses & Dissertations 2014-01-01 Safety Measures For Trucks: A Comparison Between EU And U.S. Jan Kapusta University of Texas at El Paso, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd Part of the Civil Engineering Commons Recommended Citation Kapusta, Jan, "Safety Measures For Trucks: A Comparison Between EU And U.S." (2014). Open Access Theses & Dissertations. 1652. https://digitalcommons.utep.edu/open_etd/1652 This is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UTEP. It has been accepted for inclusion in Open Access Theses & Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UTEP. For more information, please contact [email protected]. SAFETY MEASURES FOR TRUCKS: A COMPARISON BETWEEN EU AND U.S. JAN KAPUSTA Department of Civil Engineering APPROVED: Ruey Long Cheu, Ph.D., Chair Ing. Thompson Sarkodie-Gyan, Ph.D., Co-Chair Ing. Anton Hudák, Ph.D. Carlos M. Ferregut, Ph.D Bess Sirmon-Taylor, Ph.D. Interim Dean of the Graduate School Copyright © by Jan Kapusta 2014 Dedication I would like to dedicate this thesis to my amazing girlfriend, my wonderful family and my friends who provided me with endless support throughout the process of writing this thesis. SAFETY MEASURES FOR TRUCKS: A COMPARISON BETWEEN EU AND U.S. by JAN KAPUSTA THESIS Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of The University of Texas at El Paso in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE Department of Civil Engineering THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO May 2014 Acknowledgements I would like to thank my American supervisors: Dr. Kelvin Cheu, Ph.D. and Ing. Thompson Sarkodie-Gyan, Ph.D., for the guidance during the writing process of thesis and providing me with support and also with stronger words if needed. My sincere gratitude is for my Slovak supervisor Ing. Anton Hudák, Ph.D., who also tried to help as much as possible due to a long distance and for all of the useful information while forming the thesis. I would also like to thank my family and my girlfriend for their unconditional support, whether moral or financial during this program. Their love and faith in me always helps me in meeting my goals and progress. I want to thank my colleagues Esi, Petr, Radim and Tadeáš in the BIG lab, who were helping me with every little daily thing during the writing process of thesis. It has been a pleasure for me to meet them. v Declaration This thesis is an output of the Transatlantic Dual Masters Degree Program in Transportation Science and Logistics Systems, a joint project between Czech Technical University, Czech Republic, The University of Texas at El Paso, USA and University of Zilina, Slovak Republic. This thesis is jointly supervised by the following faculty members: Ruey Long Cheu, Ph.D., The University of Texas at El paso Ing. Thompson Sarkodie-Gyan, Ph.D., The University of Texas at El Paso Ing. Anton Hudák, Ph.D., University of Zilina The contents of this research were developed under an EU-U.S. Atlantis grant (P116J100057) from the International and Foreign Language Education Programs (IFLE), U.S. Department of Education. However, those contents do not necessarily represent the policy of the Department of Education, and you should not assume endorsement by the Federal Government. This research is co-funded by the European Commission’s Directorate General for Education and Culture (DG EAC) under Agreement 2010-2843/001–001–CPT EU-US TD. vi Abstract Road transportation is playing an important role in almost all of the freight movements and contributes to the economy. It has the highest share in the modal division of transported goods. This situation is not about to change in next years to come. Therefore, it is necessary to change the current situation and create rules and regulations that would lead to decrease in number of accidents either in EU or in U.S. The goal of this research is to analyze selected parameters related to the safety of truck transportation in EU and in U.S. This thesis also identifies and compares different safety measures, rules and regulations that govern the safety of truck transportation in EU and U.S. The main focus is to infer different causes of accidents since number of accidents is a good safety indicator. Finally, suggestions for improvements in terms of truck safety in EU and U.S. are proposed. Key words: Truck drivers, safety, policy of EU and U.S., accident factors and rates. vii Table of Contents Acknowledgements ..................................................................................................................... v Declaration ................................................................................................................................. vi Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... vii 1 Introduction ............................................................................................................................. 1 1.1 Background ...................................................................................................................... 1 1.2 Thesis Objective ............................................................................................................... 6 1.3 Thesis Organization.......................................................................................................... 6 2 Comparison of Truck Operations in EU and U.S. ................................................................... 8 2.1 Vehicle Specifications ...................................................................................................... 8 2.1.1 EU Truck Configurations and Dimensions ............................................................... 8 2.1.2 U.S. Truck Configurations and Dimensions ........................................................... 11 2.1.3 Comparison of Typical Trucks ............................................................................... 12 2.2 Number of Trucks .......................................................................................................... 13 2.2.1 Situation in the European Union ............................................................................. 13 2.2.2 Situation in the United States .................................................................................. 14 2.3 Weight of Transported Goods ........................................................................................ 16 2.4 Economic Impact............................................................................................................ 18 2.5 Employment in Road Transportation ............................................................................. 21 2.6 Fuel Prices ...................................................................................................................... 23 3 Comparison of Networks for Trucks ..................................................................................... 27 3.1 Highway Networks ......................................................................................................... 27 3.2 Most Used Highways ..................................................................................................... 32 3.3 Intermodal Moves .......................................................................................................... 34 3.4 Most Used Water Ports for Intermodality ...................................................................... 37 3.5 Congestion Areas ........................................................................................................... 39 viii 4 Statistics of Truck Accidents - Introduction .......................................................................... 43 4.1 Total Number of Fatal Accidents ................................................................................... 44 4.2 Statistics by Type of Accident ....................................................................................... 46 4.2.1 Head-On Collision .................................................................................................. 47 4.2.2 Side Collision .......................................................................................................... 48 4.2.3 Rollover................................................................................................................... 48 4.2.4 Accident Classification and Comparison ................................................................ 49 4.3 Accident Severity ........................................................................................................... 53 4.4 Age of Drivers ................................................................................................................ 61 4.5 Speeding Factor .............................................................................................................. 63 4.6 Alcohol and Drug Use .................................................................................................... 65 4.7 Cost of Accidents ........................................................................................................... 68 5 Truck Transportation Rules and Regulations ........................................................................ 70 5.1 Driver Regulations ......................................................................................................... 70 5.1.1 Driver Licenses
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Fedex Ground Contractor Operating Agreement
    OP-149 FEDEX GROUND {ACKAGE SYSTEM, INC. PICK-UP AND DELIVERY CONTRACTOR OPERATING AGREEMENT. JUNE 2002 TABLE OF CONTENTS BACKGROUND STATEMENT ................................................................................................... I 1. EQUIPMENT AND OPERA nONS ........................................................................................ 2 1.1 Power Equipment. ....................................................................................................... 2 1.2 Equipment Maintenance ............................................................................................. 2 1.3 Operating Expenses. ........... .............. .... ...... ........... .............. .................... ..... ..... ......... 3 1.4 Operation of the Equipment. ....................................................................................... 3 1.5 Equipment Identification while in FedEx Ground's Service ....................................... 4 1.6 Licensing ..................................................................................................................... 4 1.7 Logs and Reports. .......................................... ............................ .............. ................... 5 1.8 Shipping Documents and Collections ......................................................................... 5 1.9 Contractor Performance Escrow Account ................................................................... 5 1.10 Agreed Standard of Service .....................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • GAO-15-641, MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY: Additional Research Standards and Truck Drivers' Schedule Data Could Allow More Accurate A
    United States Government Accountability Office Report to Congressional Requesters July 2015 MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY Additional Research Standards and Truck Drivers’ Schedule Data Could Allow More Accurate Assessments of the Hours of Service Rule GAO-15-641 July 2015 MOTOR CARRIER SAFETY Additional Research Standards and Truck Drivers’ Schedule Data Could Allow More Accurate Assessments of the Hours of Service Rule Highlights of GAO-15-641, a report to congressional requesters Why GAO Did This Study What GAO Found FMCSA—within the Department of GAO found that the January 2014 study issued by the Federal Motor Carrier Transportation (DOT)—issues rules to Safety Administration (FMCSA) to examine the efficacy of its hours of service address safety concerns of the motor (HOS) rule—a regulation that governs how many hours truck drivers transporting carrier industry, including on truck freight can work—followed most generally accepted research standards. drivers’ HOS. In July 2013, FMCSA However, FMCSA did not completely meet certain research standards such as began to enforce three new provisions reporting limitations and linking the conclusions to the results. For example, by of its HOS rule. GAO was asked to not adhering to these standards, FMCSA’s conclusion in the study about the review a 2014 FMCSA study on the extent to which crash risk is reduced by the HOS rule may be overstated. GAO rule, as well as the rule’s assumptions found that FMCSA has not adopted guidance on the most appropriate methods and effects. This report (1) compares for designing, analyzing, and reporting the results of scientific research. Without the study to generally accepted research standards, and (2) identifies such guidance, FMCSA may be at risk for excluding critical elements in research the assumptions used to estimate the it undertakes to evaluate the safety of its rules, leaving itself open to criticism.
    [Show full text]
  • Minibus Handbook 3
    QBE European Operations Minibus Operator Handbook A guide to managing risk Contents UK regulatory information 3 Minibuses and drivers’ hours 6 Tachographs 11 Driving effectively 12 Young people and special requirements 15 Operational procedures 17 In the event of an incident 22 At the end of the journey 26 Safe operating checklist 27 Useful information 28 The buffer between the best-laid plans and uncertain reality 29 QBE for minibus insurance 30 QBE Minibus Handbook 3 UK regulatory information Driving licences for minibuses you can only do so if you have passed a further test to obtain Category D1. A minibus is normally a vehicle that can carry between 8 and 16 passengers plus the driver. If you wish to take a minibus (8 seats or If you can carry more than 16 passengers then larger) outside the UK in the EU/EEA area, you should seek proper guidance as you may irrespective of the purpose of the trip, you will require a different category of driving licence. need to have the full Category D1 entitlement (obtained through examination) unless all four Driving Licences for minibuses changed in of the criteria below are met: January 2013. If you are unfamiliar with these changes please visit: www.gov.uk/changes-to- • It is not for Hire and Reward the-driving-licence-and-categories • You passed your driving test before 1st January 1997 and have the Category D1 These changes do not affect you if you held entitlement (not for Hire and Reward) on your licence before 19 January 2013. The your licence new licence quotes the minibus category as • You are not being paid D1 and you will need to have an authority to • The visit is a temporary one.
    [Show full text]
  • Think Like Your Customer
    2010 YEAR IN REVIEW THINK LIKE YOUR CUSTOMER Put on a hard hat. Walk the job site. Check the engine readings. Examine the project schedule. Evaluate the bottom line. These are just a few of the tasks that thousands of Caterpillar customers around the world perform every day. The more closely we can see the job from our customers’ point of view, the more likely we are to meet their needs. And when that happens, we all win. 1 2010 YEAR IN REVIEW CHAIRMAN’S MESSAGE THINK LIKE AN OWNER Throughout my career, whenever I’ve taken on a new job, I’ve really had to learn as I go. Most people probably have that same experience because there usually isn’t Doug Oberhelman time for a lengthy transition – your boss shows you Chairman and CEO to your new desk and away you go. But this year, as I started my new job – my dream job – as Chairman and CEO of Caterpillar, I did have the benefit of a smooth and carefully planned transition. Jim Owens designed a plan that allowed me to focus on creating our new strategy while he kept the day-to-day operations under control. For six months, I led a diverse group of Caterpillar leaders as we took a critical, in-depth look at our business and laid out our new Enterprise Strategy to guide Caterpillar from 2010 to 2015. Jim kept the team focused on finishing strong on our 2010 goals, while I worked with our leaders to create and teach our new strategy to employees, dealers and suppliers.
    [Show full text]
  • DISPATCH June 2014
    DISPATCH June 2014 Hours of Service Restart Ruling On June 5, 2014, American Trucking Associations leaders applauded the Senate Appropriations Committee for adopting a common sense solution proposed by Sen. Susan Collins (R-Maine) to address the unjustified changes to the restart provisions of the hours-of- Inside service restart rules. Truck Driving “Since these rules were proposed in 2010, ATA has maintained they were unsupported by Championships Results science. Since they were implemented in 2013, the industry and economy have experienced substantial negative effects as a result,” said Bill Graves, ATA President and CEO. “Thanks to Senator Collins’ leadership, we are a step closer to reversing these damaging, unjustified WHG PRO Truck Golf regulations.” Classic Results The Collins Amendment would suspend, for a year, the new restart rules that push more trucks onto the road during daytime hours, a consequence the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Highlights from ATA Administration failed to fully analyze from a safety standpoint. Leadership Conference “America expects its freight to be moved, and these new rules prevent some drivers from taking a restart over the weekend,” said Phil Byrd, ATA Chairman and president of Bulldog Hiway Express, Charleston, S.C. “As a result, they need to take their restart midweek leading to shipping delays and costs. If you’re fortunate enough to be able to take your restart over a weekend, it exacerbates congestion because this regulation dumps concentrated amounts of trucks on the highway system at 5:01 a.m. Monday morning when America is heading off to work and school,” Byrd said. “This is not the end of this debate,” said Dave Osiecki, ATA executive vice president and head of national advocacy, “Thanks to the hard work of ATA’s members, the professional staff, ATA’s federation partners and the courage and leadership of Sen.
    [Show full text]
  • Decision and Order
    U.S. Department of Labor Office of Administrative Law Judges 800 K Street, NW, Suite 400-N Washington, DC 20001-8002 (202) 693-7300 (202) 693-7365 (FAX) Issue Date: 15 November 2013 In the matter of TIMOTHY J. BISHOP, Complainant v. CASE NO. 2013-STA-00004 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE, Respondent Appearances: Paul Taylor, Esquire For the Complainant Mark Jacobs, Esquire For the Respondent Before: DANIEL F. SOLOMON Administrative Law Judge DECISION AND ORDER This proceeding arises from a claim brought under the employee protection provisions of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act (“STAA”), 49 U.S.C. § 31105, filed by Timothy Bishop (“Complainant”) against United Parcel Service (“Respondent”). Appellate jurisdiction in this matter lies with the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. PROCEDURAL HISTORY On July 29, 2011 Complainant filed a complaint against Respondent alleging that Respondent had discharged him in violation of the employee protection provisions of the STAA. The Secretary of Labor issued Preliminary Findings and an Order on October 12, 2012. Complainant filed objections to the Secretary’s Findings and Order on October 18, 2012. A hearing was held in St. Louis, MO on June 5, 2013. ALJ Exhibit (“AX”) 1; Joint Exhibits (“JX”) 1-9; Complainant’s Exhibits (“CX”) 2 and 6-13, and Respondent’s Exhibits (“RX”) 103, 108, 113, 115, and 124 were admitted into evidence. Tr. 6, 13, 154, 159, 161, 164- 167, 227. At the hearing the following witnesses provided testimony: Allen Worthy, Frank Fogerty III, Rick Meierotto, Bernard Alton White, Daryl Leonard Bradshaw, Rhonda Bishop, Complainant, and Derrick Sizemore. STIPULATIONS Complainant and Respondent stipulated to the following: 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Case 1:17-Cv-00440 Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 20
    Case 1:17-cv-00440 Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 1 of 20 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO JAIME LOREE ARMIJO, on behalf of herself and all others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Civil No. ________________ FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., a foreign company, Defendant. CLASS ACTION COMPLAINT AND JURY DEMAND COMES NOW Plaintiff Jaime Loree Armijo, on her own behalf and on behalf of all others similarly situated, by and through undersigned counsel, and asserts to the best of her knowledge, information and belief, formed after an inquiry reasonable under the circumstances, the following: INTRODUCTION 1. FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (hereafter, “FedEx Ground”) has fought – and largely lost – a 15-year-plus battle with its drivers over their correct classification as employees or independent contractors. For reasons mostly relating to securing business advantages over competitors, FedEx classified its drivers as independent contractors, which in turn forced the drivers to carry most of the expenses relating to courier overhead. Over the last five years, this classification status has been consistently rejected by various courts. See, e.g., Slayman v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., 765 F.3d 1033 (9th Cir. 2014); Craig v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., 335 P.3d 66 (Kan. 2014) (per curiam); Alexander v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., 765 F.3d 981 (9th Cir. 2014). The quantity of litigation arising from FedEx Ground’s Case 1:17-cv-00440 Document 1 Filed 04/11/17 Page 2 of 20 claimed status of its drivers is the byproduct of the operating agreements it entered into with its drivers.
    [Show full text]
  • The Hours of Service (HOS) Rule for Commercial Truck Drivers and the Electronic Logging Device (ELD) Mandate
    The Hours of Service (HOS) Rule for Commercial Truck Drivers and the Electronic Logging Device (ELD) Mandate David Randall Peterman Analyst in Transportation Policy March 18, 2020 Congressional Research Service 7-.... www.crs.gov R46276 SUMMARY R46276 The Hours of Service (HOS) Rule March 18, 2020 for Commercial Truck Drivers and the David Randall Peterman Analyst in Transportation Electronic Logging Device (ELD) Mandate Policy In response to the COVID-19 outbreak, on March 13, 2020, the Department of Transportation [email protected] (DOT) issued a national emergency declaration to exempt from the Hours of Service (HOS) rule through April 12, 2020, commercial drivers providing direct assistance in support of relief efforts For a copy of the full report, related to the virus. This includes transport of certain supplies and equipment, as well as please call 7-.... or visit personnel. Drivers are still required to have at least 10 consecutive hours off duty (eight hours if www.crs.gov. transporting passengers) before returning to duty. It has been estimated that up to 20% of bus and large truck crashes in the United States involve fatigued drivers. In order to promote safety by reducing the incidence of fatigue among commercial drivers, federal law limits the number of hours a driver can drive through the HOS rule. Currently the HOS rule allows truck drivers to work up to 14 hours a day, during which time they can drive up to 11 hours, followed by at least 10 hours off duty before coming on duty again; also, within the first 8 hours on duty drivers must take a 30-minute break in order to continue driving beyond 8 hours.
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding the FMCSA's Final Rule on Elds
    Understanding the FMCSA’s Final Rule on ELDs An Overview of Electronic Logging Devices (ELDs) and Compliance for Fleets Vik Sridhar, Solutions Engineer, HOS Expert February 2016 Introduction In December 2015, the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) released the fnal ruling requiring the use of electronic logging devices (ELDs) for the commercial truck and bus industries. The fnal rule was implemented to improve road safety, strengthen compliance, and protect commercial drivers. To assist feets in complying with the new regulations, Geotab has prepared this overview of the changes in the new regulations, including an electronic logging history and a comparison of the changes in the different rulings. This paper addresses these important questions: • What is an ELD? • Who does the new ELD rule impact? • What is the timeframe for compliance? • What should motor carriers do to comply? • What are the benefts of ELDs? • How can Geotab help with HOS/DVIR compliance? Understanding the FMCSA’s Final Rule on ELDs | 2 What is an ELD? ELD = Electronic Logging Device An electronic logging device (ELD) is a device that attaches to a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) to synchronize with the engine and record Hours of Service (HOS).1 As defned by the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, a commercial motor vehicle (CMV) is a self- propelled or towed motor vehicle used on a highway for interstate commerce, transporting passengers or property, and meeting certain criteria for weight and design or use.2 The ELD facilitates considerably more accurate recording of all driver activity by providing “snapshots” of the vehicle’s location throughout the driver’s day.1 ELDs automatically record driving time and monitor information such as location, engine hours, vehicle movement, and miles driven.
    [Show full text]
  • $60 Million Settlement Reached in Caterpillar Engine Suit California Operators Fighting 'Crazy' Bus Regulations
    July 15, 2016 $60 million settlement reached in Caterpillar engine suit CAMDEN, N.J. — Motor- trucking companies alleging that hearing in September. Vandalia Bus Lines in Caseyville, engines that were “problematic.” coach operators who found them- Caterpillar sold them engines with Meanwhile, motorcoach oper- Ill., and one of Burke’s clients in He has since sold the buses. selves stuck with defective Cater- defective anti-pollution systems. ators and trucking companies can the lawsuit, said he hasn’t had “The problems were related to pillar engines on their buses might Caterpillar agreed to the settle- file claims under the settlement, time to think much about the case emissions standards, and they soon be able to recoup some of the ment but said it still stands behind according to Richard Burke, an at- lately but is happy it appears to (Caterpillar) tried to do a Band- money they spent on repairs. its legal positions and its products. torney with Quantum Legal LLC, have been resolved. Aid job with the EPA,” he said. A federal judge in New Jersey U.S. District Judge Jerome B. one of five law firms representing “I have a stack of paperwork “They did a temporary fix.” has given preliminary approval to Simandle said in an order that he plaintiffs in the case. (See legal on this,” Streif said, adding that Streif said he plans to file a $60 million settlement to end a agreed with the terms of the settle- notice on Page 5.) his company purchased four or claims under the settlement and class-action suit filed by bus and ment but will hold a final approval Dennis Streif, vice president of five new buses with Caterpillar CONTINUED ON PAGE 18 c ELDs: Small operators vs.
    [Show full text]
  • District One Freight Trucking Forum 17 August 2017
    District One Freight Trucking Forum 17 August 2017 Keith Robbins District Freight Coordinator, FDOT District One Agenda • Purpose and Intent for the Working Group • Welcoming Remarks - Polk County Sheriff’s Office • Remarks by Director of Operations, District One • Access Management • Remarks by the Florida Trucking Association • Cargo Theft and Safety Update • Ideas to Make Life better for Trucking • Advances in Autonomous Vehicle Technology – A Trucking Perspective • District 1 DFC Update • ELD Mandate Q&A Led by the FHP • Truck Parking Activity Freight Mobility • Closing thru the Heartland of Florida Administrative Remarks • Restrooms • Emergency Procedures • Ground Rules for What is Presented • Available Handouts for Reference • Thank you… Thank you to the following for making it out! Purpose and Intent for the Working Group Purpose: To inform the trucking industry of trending issues noted by law enforcement and FDOT personnel, provide information that may be helpful in enhancing their operations and safety programs for their companies and drivers, and respond to questions and concerns raised from the audience. Intent: What We Hope to Accomplish • Raise awareness of roles and authorities of state and local agencies who “touch” the trucking industry • Generate dialogue on current issues and concerns noted by industry stakeholders to identify ways to seek resolutions • Work with industry and law enforcement to bridge the gap of understanding how we can work better together to achieve goals • Cultivate positive relations between public and private sector to promote a safer and more efficient operating environment for us all Polk County Sheriff’s Office Major Joseph Williams Special Operations Division FDOT District One Rick Lilyquist Director of Operations FDOT State and District Leadership Changes State Secretary Mike Dew District 1 Secretary L.K.
    [Show full text]
  • Distracted Driving White Paper
    Distracted Driving White Paper Prepared by: Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators June 2018 *Table 5 Amendments, December 2018 JUNE 2018 ISBN: 978-1-927993-33-0 Canadian Council of Motor Transport Administrators 1111 Prince of Wales Drive, Suite 404 Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3T2 T: 613.736.1003 F: 613.736.1395 E: [email protected] ccmta.ca ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS CCMTA’s Distracted Driving Task Force was established to help reduce distracted driving as a contributing factor to motor vehicle collision fatalities and serious injuries in Canada. A significant role of the Task Force was to provide guidance to the development of CCMTA’s Distracted Driving Action Plan. The Distracted Driving White Paper is an important key deliverable of this Action Plan. CCMTA gratefully acknowledges the contributions of the Distracted Driving Task Force members and their colleagues to the White Paper’s structure, content development and for their review of the final document. CCMTA DISTRACTED DRIVING TASK FORCE Fazelah Ali, Government of Ontario Michael DeJong (CCMTA Board Liaison), Transport Canada Shannon Ell, SGI Christine Eisan, Government of Nova Scotia Joanne Harbluk (Co-Chair), Transport Canada Mychele Joyes, Government of Alberta Caroll Lau, Transport Canada Doug MacEwen (CCMTA Board Liaison), Government of Prince Edward Island Nadia Maranda, Government of Quebec Michael Marth, Transport Canada Caithlin McArton, Government of Manitoba Mark Milner (Co-Chair), ICBC Rebecca Rego, Government of Alberta Contents 1.0 Executive Summary……………………………..…………………………………………………………………………….….………..1
    [Show full text]