Drug Tests Urged for Hazardous Load Drivers

Truck drivers who haul hazardous chemicals should be required to pass drug and alcohol tests to qualify for and keep their California licenses, and employers should test truckers who appear to be intoxicated, a panel of officials from eight state agencies has recommended.

Citing a rising number of truck accidents in California and evidence of drug use among truckers, the state managers included the testing recommendation in a lengthy report on the transportation of hazardous materials that is scheduled for release by the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) next week.

In a draft version of that report obtained by The Times, the agencies called for toughening road tests for all truck driver licenses and for installing computerized monitoring equipment in heavy trucks to record speeds and driving hours.

They also recommended special training requirements for truck drivers who haul dangerous chemicals. Such standards for drivers have long been discussed in California but are not in place except for truckers who move radioactive materials.

Ready for Submission

The recommendations in the draft, dated August, 1986, are the same as a final version that will be submitted to the Legislature in a few days, said Caltrans spokesman Gene Berthelsen.

The study noted difficulties in collecting accurate figures on the movement of hazardous chemicals in the state and on the number of spills, leaks and accidents involving trucks and railroad cars. Caltrans reported 420 highway spills in 1985; the California Highway Patrol reported 166 incidents during the same period. The report failed to explain the difference.

But the agency officials agreed that additional steps must be taken to avoid highway and rail catastrophes that could easily spill into residential areas nearby.

Sierra Club lobbyist Michael Paparian, who received a copy of the report from an undisclosed source, said his organization is concerned that the recommendations do not go far enough. He complained that the study was almost five months overdue--after missing a Sept. 1, 1986, deadline set by the Legislature. “Given the commitment of the Deukmejian Administration to resolving toxics problems as quickly as possible, it is amazing they can’t get a report like this out on time so that policy makers can act on it,” Paparian said.

Paparian also pointed to a long list of proposals, identified in the draft report, that were rejected by policy makers from the eight agencies. He contended that many of the ideas were tossed aside because they would require adding state employees. For example, the panel members could not agree on a recommendation to increase random roadside truck safety checks and to require that all heavy trucks be inspected annually. The report also refused to endorse a number of proposals intended to improve tunnel safety, such as installing dry chemical fire extinguishers, because of high cost or low effectiveness.

The agencies also sidestepped potentially controversial recommendations to improve general highway safety that have had difficulty winning legislative support in the past--such as cutting the state’s blood alcohol limit for drivers in half and equipping the CHP with radar to reduce speeding.

The number of truck accidents has risen sharply in recent years, in part because of deregulation of the trucking industry by state and federal governments, according to the report. In 1985, the CHP reported 18,029 truck-caused accidents--up 48% from the 1982 total of 12,149.

Driver error was listed as the most common cause of those accidents.

Urge Drug Testing

Under current state and federal licensing requirements, drivers of heavy trucks and buses are required to pass medical examinations every two years.

The agency officials have recommended adding mandatory drug testing to those exams. Drug screening would also be part of every driver’s pre-employment physical.

A number of large trucking firms already have similar requirements for their employees, said George Bravo, vice president of Teamsters Local 208 in Los Angeles. And under guidelines approved by the union, the companies can require testing when they have reason to suspect drug abuse, Bravo said in an interview.

However, the state study cited Teamsters’ statistics in support of the recommendation to make drug testing a state requirement. “One employer with 750 drivers found 17% of the drivers tested (under an agreement with the Teamsters) showed alcohol or drug use,” the report said, even though the employees were given at least 30 days’ warning that they would be tested. Among job applicants, 50% tested positive for drug or alcohol use.

Random Testing

The state officials did not consider the possibility of random testing of drivers hauling hazardous chemicals. Earlier this week, U.S. Transportation Secretary Elizabeth Hanford Dole said she would require random drug tests for airline pilots and flight crews and for employees in her own department.

The state recommendations were based on the results of more than 230 studies of hazardous chemical shipments reviewed by technical staff for the eight agencies: Caltrans, CHP, Department of Motor Vehicles, the Public Utilities Commission, state Fire Marshal, Department of Fish and Game, Department of Health Services, and Office of Emergency Services.