1200 Walnut Bottom Rd., Suite 331 | Carlisle, PA 17015
Posted on May 15th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
The transportation industry has seen a number of changes over the last several months, includes a variety of regulatory revisions to FMCSA, HOS, and more. Let’s take a look back at some of our most popular blogs chronicling the substantial issues in the changes.
Posted on May 8th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
FMCSA recently made available to motor carriers and law enforcement a preview of the planned changes to CSA’s Motor Carrier Safety Measurement System (SMS). The preview period lasts until the changes are made available to the public in July of 2012.
The changes to the SMS system are intended to improve the effectiveness of the identifying and prioritizing high-risk and unsafe motor carriers for enforcement in order to decrease crashes and hazardous material incidents. The preview will enable motor carriers to see how the changes to the SMS system will impact their individual safety data within the SMS system.
The changes are as follows:
1. Moving cargo/load securement violations to the Maintenance BASIC from the Cargo-Related BASIC;
2. Renaming the Cargo-Related BASIC the HM BASIC and changing how HM carriers are classified to better identify HM-related safety problems;
3. Better aligning SMS with Intermodal Equipment Provider (IEP) Regulations;
4. Aligning violations that are included in the SMS with the Commercial Vehicle Safety Alliance (CVSA) inspection levels by eliminating the vehicle violations derived from driver-only inspections and driver violations from vehicle-only inspections;
5. Improving the identification of passenger carriers; and
6. Changing the SMS website to display:
a. Change in terminology to fact-based definitions that clarify the carrier’s status in each BASIC; and
b. Distinguishing between crashes with injuries and crashes with fatalities.
Posted on May 1st, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
States are now in the process of linking a driver’s DOT physical qualification to their driver’s license. Your state should provide you with information as to the process and requirements of doing so.
However, here are several considerations for you and your drivers:
MAKE SURE THE DRIVER’S ADDRESS IS CURRENT-Driver’s must make sure that the DOT has their current address. While this is always important, it is even more so during this process. You may want to remind them to do so…and to let whomever gets their mail to be on the lookout.
CONTINUE TO CARRY CARD-Recommend drivers continue to carry their physical exam card, even if the DOT says that it is theoretically not necessary to do so. A breakdown in the system could mean an unnecessary out-of-service at an inopportune time (as if there is an “opportune time” for an OS violation).
THINK AHEAD-The process appears to be varying from state-to-state. Some will allow walk ins at DOT centers. Others require the information to be completed via mail or online. Whatever your state requires, be sure the driver thinks ahead so they are not unnecessarily parked because of a delay.
Posted on April 24th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
We recently achieved a decision that Pennsylvania’s towing law’s provision for “unqualified compensation” did not obligate a carrier to pay whatever the tower charged. This was the first published opinion interpreting this provision.
The action arose from a towing company’s billing for righting and towing a tractor trailer. The tower refused to release the unit until its bill was paid. The carrier offered a payment of less than the bill which was rejected by the towing company.
The carrier then sued the towing company for the release of its unit and claiming the charges were excessive.
The towing company asked the Court to find that it was entitled to full payment of its bill based upon the Pennsylvania law. That law provides that an entity authorized by the State Police to tow a vehicle “shall have the unqualified right to compensation for the cost of removal and cargo storage and clean up from the owner…” Pa. Motor Vehicle Code Section 3757.
The towing company argued that, based upon this provision, it was entitled to be paid the amount of its bill without any right of the carrier to question or challenge it. It asserted that whatever was billed was required to be paid according to that law.
We responded that the law entitles a tower to payment. However, the payment is subject to the requirement of reasonableness, necessity, and relation consistent with all other damage recoveries in Pennsylvania.
We argued that under the tower’s interpretation requiring automatic payment, a towing company is in a superior position to a permanently incapacitated person who must prove that their medical bills are reasonable, necessary, and related to the accident.
We also argued that denying a carrier’s right to challenge the reasonableness, necessity, and relationship of the tower’s bill violated the carrier’s Constitutional rights.
The Court rendered a thorough and well-reasoned opinion, rejecting the towing company’s interpretation. It held that “the vehicle owner is entitled to its day in court.”
It further ordered the towing company to respond to our discovery as to the basis for the bill.
Posted on April 17th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
This is our 100th blog at Marcello & Kivisto, LLC. We’ve covered news, best practices, and industry info about transportation law, trucking law, and a variety of specific topics like FMCSA, HOS, case studies, legal defense and prep, and examples of what happens when companies don’t follow these rules to protect themselves. Trucking & transportation is an important and lucrative industry, but all too often companies get caught making mistakes that can cost them and others big money. For a free and easy way to sharpen your skills and stay abreast of industry issues, continue to follow our blog. And if you have questions, just contact us!
Posted on April 9th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
On January 18, 2012, FMCSA published a new Behavior Analysis and Safety Improvement Category (BASIC) fact sheet on the CSA program’s website. It is important for drivers and motor carriers to be aware of the implications of CSA. The fact sheet is meant to assist drivers and motor carriers to comply with the Federal Safety Regulations as well as educate them on the seven BASICs and applicable regulations.
In January 2012, ATRI published on its website updated versions of its compendium of state idling laws. The update includes two new regulations as well as a regulation that will be effective in the near future. For more information, contact us today.
Posted on March 30th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
On January 13, 2012, new legislation went into effect requiring cross over mirrors to be installed on all trucks that 1) qualify as commercial vehicles, 2) are registered in New York and 3) operate in New York City on streets (other than expressways).
The mirrors are to be installed on the front of the vehicle and will enable a driver to see anything that is at least three feet tall, passing a foot in front of the truck for the length of the truck. The new law can be found under Section 375-10e of the New York Vehicle and Traffic Law.
The New York State Motor Truck Association has indicated that a violation under this new law will be considered a “fix it” violation. Meaning that a violator will be given one business day to correct the violation and if the violator makes the correction the ticket will be dismissed. The documentation establishing that the violation was corrected needs to be provided to the court before the summons return date. If a violation is not corrected the violator will be subject to a $150 fine (for the first offense) plus court costs.
Posted on March 20th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
Doug Marcello has served as an expert guest for numerous seminars and webinars on trucking law and trucking defense. Frequently, Doug speaks in webinars by KCI Trucking about common legal pitfalls, hurdles for the trucking and transportation industry, and the numerous and complex changes to regulatory legislation such as Hours of Service. To view these recorded webinars, visit the KCI trucking webinars page. For more information, contact us today!
Posted on March 12th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
Over the last few months, we’ve covered a number of issues vital to the trucking industry, including legal requirements, documentation & procedure, and business best practices. These are a few of the most popular blogs on the subjects. Check back soon for more updates on the trucking industry and how to protect your investments.
Posted on March 5th, 2012 by transportationlegalnews
Recently the Office of Drug & Alcohol Policy & Compliance issued a statement clarifying that Medical Review Officers (MROs) and contact with an employee’s treating physicians.
Specifically, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) does not apply to MROs who are acting under 49 CFR Part 40 as part of their verification process. MROs do not need and MUST not attempt to obtain an employee’s permission in order to confer with the employee’s prescribing physicians. Rather an MRO is encouraged to follow-up with a treating physician or pharmacy when suspicions or question arise during a verification interview.
