NSC Alcohol, Drugs and Impairment Division news NSC Labor Division news Trucking Transportation

Trucking group pushes lawmakers for action on safe parking and drug testing

Dellinger.jpg
Photo: House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee

Washington — The American Trucking Associations is calling on lawmakers to assist in efforts to expand safe truck parking and drug testing for truck drivers.

Testifying during a House Highways and Transit Subcommittee hearing on Jan. 22, weeks after the 119th Congress kicked off, ATA Chair Dennis Dellinger said lawmakers can help advance industry safety via legislation on various long-standing trucker concerns.

“Promoting safety for the motoring public and our drivers is a high priority for the trucking industry,” Dellinger said, “and that’s reflected in the fact that motor carriers invest over $14 billion annually in safety-related systems and training.

“But this is bigger than us; we need Congress to help build on that progress, from increasing truck parking that would alleviate dangerous situations where truckers are forced to park in unauthorized locations to ensuring that effective and robust drug testing protocols remain intact to keep drivers who are under the influence off our roads.”

In October, a lack of safe places for truck drivers to stop and rest ranked second on the American Transportation Research Institute’s annual list of top trucking industry concerns. ATRI is the research arm of ATA.

In his written testimony, Dellinger reiterated ATA’s support for a previous bill introduced by Rep. Mike Bost (R-IL) that would have empowered the transportation secretary to issue grants for projects that create truck parking. Bost, a former truck driver and subcommittee member, suggested during the hearing that he’ll reintroduce the legislation during the new Congress.

Bost asked if states would seek funding for truck parking if Congress established a grant program. Jim Tymon, executive director of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, responded: “If there was a grant program for truck parking, states would be interested in that."

He added: “I would say that it’s not just availability of funding on the state DOT side. A lot of the right-of-way the state DOTs have control of, there is a restriction as to what they can do within that right-of-way, including establishing new rest areas and commercializing them to be able to support truck parking.”

Dellinger’s written testimony criticized “regulatory limbo” that has slowed a Department of Transportation final rule that established oral fluid drug testing as an approved method for truck drivers and other transportation workers in safety-sensitive positions.

A revised DOT final rule that went into effect Dec. 5 states that employers can’t implement oral fluid testing until the Department of Health and Human Services has certified at least two laboratories to conduct it. A notice HHS published Jan. 3 indicates that no labs have been certified.

Under a proposed rule published Dec. 9, DOT would temporarily revise drug testing procedures to require employers to directly observe urine tests “in situations where oral fluid tests are currently required but oral fluid testing is not yet available.” These include if an original sample “was invalid without adequate medical explanation” or testing is for a worker’s return to duty. DOT accepted comments on the proposal through Jan. 8.

“Federal acceptance of both oral fluids and hair testing as independent, alternative testing methods would allow employers to identify a greater number of safety-sensitive employees who violate federal drug laws and keep these unsafe drivers off the road,” Dellinger wrote.

Post a comment to this article

Safety+Health welcomes comments that promote respectful dialogue. Please stay on topic. Comments that contain personal attacks, profanity or abusive language – or those aggressively promoting products or services – will be removed. We reserve the right to determine which comments violate our comment policy. (Anonymous comments are welcome; merely skip the “name” field in the comment box. An email address is required but will not be included with your comment.)