Investigation of the use of mobile phones while driving

Investigation of the use of mobile phones while driving

Material Information

Investigation of the use of mobile phones while driving
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research
Cain, Alaisdair
Burris, Mark
Place of Publication:
Tampa, Fla
Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
Publication Date:


Subjects / Keywords:
Traffic accidents--United States--Statistics ( lcsh )
Traffic regulations--United States--States ( lcsh )
Cellular telephones--United States--Statistics ( lcsh )
Cellular telephones--United States--Safety measures ( lcsh )
Traffic safety--United States ( lcsh )
letter ( marcgt )

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of South Florida Library
Holding Location:
University of South Florida
Rights Management:
All applicable rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier:
43117728 ( OCLC )
C01-00050 ( USFLDC DOI )
c1.50 ( USFLDC Handle )

Postcard Information



This item has the following downloads:

Full Text
xml version 1.0 encoding UTF-8 standalone no
record xmlns http:www.loc.govMARC21slim xmlns:xsi http:www.w3.org2001XMLSchema-instance xsi:schemaLocation http:www.loc.govstandardsmarcxmlschemaMARC21slim.xsd
leader ntm 22 Ka 4500
controlfield tag 008 s flunnn| ||||ineng
datafield ind1 8 ind2 024
subfield code a C01-00050
(OCoLC) 43117728
2 110
University of South Florida. Center for Urban Transportation Research.
0 245
Investigation of the use of mobile phones while driving
Tampa, Fla
b Center for Urban Transportation Research (CUTR)
c 1999 April
Traffic accidents--United States--Statistics
Traffic regulations--United States--States
Cellular telephones--United States--Statistics
Cellular telephones--United States--Safety measures
Traffic safety--United States
1 700
Cain, Alaisdair.
Burris, Mark
t Center for Urban Transportation Research Publications [USF].
4 856


Investigation of the Use of Mobile Phones While Driving Prepared by Alasdair Cain Mark Burris Center for Urban Transportation Research College of Engineering, University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave, CUT 100 Tampa, Florida 33620 April1999


INVESTIGATION OF THE USE OF MOBILE PHONES WHILE DRIVI N G EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The n umbe r of mob i le phone users in the U.S. has grown from 500,000 in 1985 t o 63 m ill ion in 1998. This rapid g r o\\1h h as occurred largely w ithottt consideration of t he mob ile p hone's suitability for usage wh i le dri ving. The objective of this r epor t is to summarize existing i nformat ion on t he subj ect of mobile phone u se whi le driving, in o rder to provide a concise su m ma ry of t he issue s for the pub lic, researche r s and l egis lat ors alike The report discusses the benefit s of mobile phone usage while driving, such a s d r iver safety a nd time use effici e ncy, and nega tiv e aspects such as i ts potential for driver distrac t ion r es u lting in accidents. T he report con t ai ns i nfo tmation on t he demographics of mobi le phone u se in t he U .S., focusing on u ser demograp h i cs and f requ e n cy of usage whi l e driving. Although once used prim a rily by high income b us iness people, user demographics are now much more sim i lar to the demographics o f t he U.S. population as a whoie Findings from literature on th e sub ject of mobile pho n e u s e and driving per fom1anc e a r e h i g h ly v a r iabl e I n general, the literature shows that the effect o f mob ile phone use on driv ing is a complex i ssue wit h several influencing fa c tors i n cluding the t yp e of mobile p ho n e use d, the type of co nv e rsa t ion u n derta k en, and t he dem o graphics of the u ser. I n general it was fo u nd that mobile phone u se doe s have a n adverse affect o n driving performance, but t h e significance of the di sttac t ion is d ifficult to q ua n t ify. Repo rt s fo un d that people that used a mob ile phone wh il e driving we r e anywhe r e fr om 34 percent to 300 percent m ore li k ely to ha v e a n accident. At p rese nt, onl y t wo states i nclu de specific chec k box es' on the ir accident i nves tigat ion forms to i dentify mobi le pho ne use as a f actor in crashes Thi s r eport conclu des t ha t data c o ll ection on a nationa l s ca l e is the first, mos t i m p ortant step t o accurately eval u a t ing the t


risk associated with mobile phone use and therefore assessing the need for any legislative regula tions on usage. Several countries have already banned mobile phone use while driv i ng and l egis l ation has been proposed in nine states i n th e U S At the time of this report (April 1999), no U S l egislation on this issue had progressed to become law. Th ere are numerous reasons for this, including the lack of data to support any legis l ative action Alternatively, laws may develop through civil court cases where mobile" phone users, manufacturers, service providers, etc are found liab l e for automobile accidents W ith mobile phone use likely t o con t inue t o increase in th e future, th e safety of driving whil e u s in g a mobi l e phone will become a very i mportant safety issue. Therefore it is important to begin to collect better data on the risks associated with using a mobile phone while driving. In t his manner, the need for l egislation can be accurately measured and, i f legislation is needed, its extent, role, and effectiveness in saving li ves can be better assessed. 11


Table of Contents EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .............. ............................................................ ........................ 1 LIST OF TABLES ... ............. ..... ............. ........................ .................... ........................... v 1. INTRODUCTION ........... ... ......... ..... ............ ............. ....................... .................... 1 1.1 BACKGROUND . .... .. ... . .. .. ........ .. .. . .. ..... . .. .. .. . .. ...... .. .. .... . .. .... .. . ... .. .. .. . .. . .. .... I 1.2 RePORT CoNTNT AND OBJECTIVEs .. .. .. ....... . .. .. . .... .. ... .... .. .... ...... . .. .. .... .. .. .. 2 1.3 DEFINITION OF "MOBI L E PHONE" ... ...... .. . ... ... .. .... . .. ..... .......... ..... ..... ... .. . .. .. .. 2 2. DEMOGRAPHICS OF MOBILE PHONE USE ............... ..... .......... ........ ..... ........ 3 2.1 INTROD U CTIO N .. .... ... ... .... ... . ... ... .. . .. ..... ....... .. ... .. .. .... .. .. . .. .. .. .. ......... . .. .. 3 2 2 DEMOGRAPHICS OF MOBIL E PHONE USERS ..... . .. .. ... ... ... ......................... ... ... .. .. 3 2.3 MOBILE PHONE USAGE WHILE DRIVING .. . . ............ .. .... ... ........ ...... .. .. ... .. . ..... 5 2 4 SAFETY BE.NEFIT S . .. ... .. ... ... ... ... .. .. . .. .. .... .. . . ..... . . ........ .. .... .. .... .. .... ... ..... . .... 7 2.5 EMERGENCY RESPONSE .... ..... .. ... .. .... ..... ... ... .. . .. ... .... .. .. ... .. .. ... .. .. .... . ..... 7 3. PUBLISIIED RESEARCH ... .. ..... ... ........ ................ .. ........ .... .. ....... ... .. ...... ..... .. 9 3.1 ON-ROAD STUDIES ... ...... .... ..... . . .. . ... . .. .. .. .. .. ..... .. .. .... . .. .... . .. .. ... .... .. .. ....... 9 3 2 SIMULATOR STUDIES .. ...... . .. ... .. .. .. .. .. ....... . ... . .... .. ...... .. .. . .. .... ..... ..... . ... . . II 3.3 EPIDEMIOLOGICAL STUDIES . .. ... . ..... .. .. . .. . . .... .... .. .. .. .. . . .. .. ... .. . .. .. ..... .. .. .. . .. . 13 3.4 GENERAL STuDies .. .. .. .. .. ..... ... ...... ........... ... .. ...... .. ...... . .... .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..... 16 3.5 S UMMARY OF ResEARCH LITER ATURE F I NDING S .. . .. ... .. .... . .. . .. . .. .. ..... ......... ... 17 3.5.1 Quantifying Crash Risk ..... ............... ........ ........... ... ............ .... .... ....... ........ 17 3 5 2 Effect of Mabile Phone Use on Driver Behavior .......... .... ......... ....... ... ....... 18 3.5.3 Hand s -Free Versus Hand-Held Mobile Phone Usage ........ ... .... . .... ........ 18 3.5.4 Effect afType of Conversation on Crash Risk .... ............. . . . .... ..... . . . .... 18 3. 5. 5 Effect of Age on Crash Risk ... .... ... ....... .... .......... . ....... .... ............. ... ...... ... 19 4 E XISTING CRASH DA TA .... .. ... ... .... ..... .. .... .......... ........... . .. . .............. .. ... .... ... 20 4.1 FARS0ATABASE .. ... ... .. ... ... ... .. .. .. . .. .. .... .. ...... .. ... .. .... . . .. .. .... . .. .. ... . ..... .. .. .. 20 4.2 NASS DATABA S E .. .. . .... .... ... . .... . .. .. .. .. ... ....... .. . ........ .. .. . . .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. 21 4.3 OKLAHOMA CR A S H DATA .. ... ... . .... .... . ...... ........ . ... .......... . .. .... .. ...... .. ... . ... ... .. 21 4.4 MINNESOTA CRASH DATA ....... ....... . . .. .. .. ....... . .. . .... . .. ... .. .. .... ..... .. ..... ..... ..... 22 4.5 JAPANESE CRASH DATA .... .. ... .... .. . .. ... . ... .... ..... .... ... .. . .. .. . .... .. .. .... .. ... .. ...... 2 3 4.6 SUM MAR Y .. .. ... .. . ...... .. ..... ... ............. .. .. .. .. ...... . .. .. . .................. .. .. .. .. .. .. 24 S. S AFE USE OF MOBILE PHONES WHILE DRIVING .................... ............ ... ... 25 6. NEW TECHNOLOGY .... ........ .. .. .... ......... ..... .. ....... .......... ................ .... ... ........ 27 6.1 INTRODU CTION ... .. ... .. .. .. . ....... ... ..... . .. .... ..... .. . . ...... .. . . ... .... . .. .. .. .. .. .. .... ... 2 7 6.2 I NCORPORAT IO N OF MOBIL E PHO NES IN OTHER COMMUNICATION D EV I C es . .. ... 27 6.3 AUTOMATED COLLIS ION N OTI FICATION (ACN) .. . .. . ... .... .. .. .... .... .. ..... ... . .. .. .. 2 7 6.4 THE INTELLIGEN T A NSWERPHONE .. . . .. . .. .. .. . ....... .. .. ............. .... ..... .. ... . . . ... 28 iii


7 LEGI S L A TION .. .. ... .. .. ... .. ... ... ...... . .. .. ....... .. ... .. .. ............. ... ....... ... . ...... ..... ..... .... 30 7 .I INTRODUCTION .. ..... ...... ..... ......... .. .. ..... .. .. ...... .... ... ...... .. . . .. . . .................. .. ..... 30 7.2 L EGISLAT ION IN TH E UNIT ED STA T E S ... .. .. ...... ... ........ ...... . .. .. ..... ...... ......... .. ..... 30 7.2.1 New York Leg i slation ... . ... . . . . ... ...... . . . ........ ... ... . . .... .... ...... ........ . . ...... 31 7 2.2 Californi a L e gis/arion ... .. . ..... . ....... . . ...... .... ... . .... ....... . .... ...... ... ... . . ... 32 7.2 3 US. Legislation Summary .... . : ....... ...... ... . .... . .......... .... ............. . ...... ... . ... 33 7 3 INTERNATIONA L E XPERIENCE .... ... .. ...... .. ......... .. .. . .. .. ...... .. .......... ...... .. .. .. .. .. .. 34 7 .3. I Imernalional Laws . ... .. .. . .. .. ............. ...... .. .. .......... ........ ... .. . . ... . . ..... . 34 7.3.2 Swilzerland . ... .... . . . ..... . ... ...... .... . . ... ........... . .... ...... .......... ..... ... ...... ....... 34 7.3. 3 United Kingdom .... ... .... . ........ . .... .... . . ... . . .... ........ ......... ... . .... .... . . ........ 35 7.4 COMPA RI SON OF SEATBEL T LEGISLATION AND MOBIL E P HONE LEGISLATION .. .. 36 8 CONC LU S ION .. . .. .. ........... ..... ..... ................................ .. .. .... .. ..... .. ........................ 38 REFE"RENCES ................................................ ..... ... ...................... .................................. 40 IV


List of Ta bl es Table 1 : Wi r el e ss Subscribe r ship ... .... . . . .............. ... ......... ... ...... . .... . . . ... .. .. .. .. ... .. ... ... 1 Table 2 : Age of Mobile Phone Users . . . . ....... ... ... . . . ....... . ... . . ... ... ... ... ... ... .. ... ... ...... . . 4 Table 3: Inc o me of Mobile Phone Use rs . .... .......... . ... . .... ...... .... . . ... ....... ....... ...... .... . . 4 Table 4: Employment Sta111s of Mobile Phqne Users . . .......... ... ... . .... .... ..... . ... .... . . . . . 4 Table 5 : Purpose of M o bile P hone Calls ......... . ...... ........... . ... .. .. .. ...... . . . ... . . .. . ...... . . . 5 Table 6 : Frequency of Mobile Phone Usage While Driving . ... .. ..... .. ... ........... .. .. .... . . .... 6 Table 7 : F req u ency of Mobile Phone Usage While Driving ... .... . . . .... . . . . .... . ........ . 6 Tab l e 8: Usage of Mobile Phones for Safety Reason s . ...... .... ... ........ ... ....... ... . ......... .... ... 7 Table 9: Contrib111ing Causes of Oklahoma Collisions 1992 1 994 .. .. .. ........ .. .. .............. 22 T able 10 : Traffic Accidenrs While the D r i v e r i s Using a Mobile Phone .... .. .... ............ .. .. 23 Tabl e I I : T ype of Mobile Phone Activil)l in Pro g r e s s when Crash Occurred .. .. .. ........... 23 v


1. Introduction 1.1 Background In September 1998 there were 63 million subscribers to wireless phones in the U S., while in 1985 there were less than 500,000 (see Table 1.) This explosion in usage has resulted in mor e people using mobil e phones in a variety of different situations. One situation with obvious safety implications is the use of mobile phones while driving a vehicle. This is an issue of growing concem that has prompted the introduction of legislation in several states and has been the subject of numerous research projects and some media attention. Table 1: Wireless Subscribership e? 70,000,000 .8 60,000,000 50,000,000 40,000,000 30,000,000 20,000,000 10,000,000 !0., !b

1.2 Report Content and Objectives T he objective of this report is to review the existing literature on the subject in order to provide a concise summary of the issues for the public, researchers, and legislators alike The report analyzes the demographics of mobile phone use to obtain a full understanding of utilization patterns. A legislative review is provided that includes an analysis of attempts to legislate mobile phone use in the U.S and also includes information from o ther countries where legislation prohibiting/limiting mobile phone use exists. The report then discusses how to imp rove safety while using a mobile phone in an effort to increase awareness of the problem and potentially save lives Finally, the report assesses the future of in-vehicle communication technology, discussing new and emerging technologies and their integration in the broader field of intelligen t transportation systems. 1.3 Defini tion of "Mobile Phone" The term "mobil e phone" has been used generically to include several forms of wireless communication. This term represents fully portable cellular and digital phones in addition to hand-held and hands-free car phones. 2


2. Demographics of Mobile Phone Use 2.1 Introduction To gain a better understanding of mobile phone usage, socio-economic characteristics of mobile phone users and most common uses are examined. Data on mobile phone ownership, usage and other issues were obtained to better understand potential problems caused by widespread usage. This chapter presents existing information from surveys and polls. The four main areas of interest are demographics of mobile phone users, usage while driving, safety benefits, and emergency response Issues 2.2 Sources oflnformation Several sources are referenc ed in this section of the report The Gallup Organization conducted the Motorola Cellular Impact Survey in 1993, and its results are compared t o a similar survey conducted in the same organization in 1991. In these surveys telephone interviews were conducted with a nationally representative sample of 660 mobile phone users. In January 1998, Peter D Hart Research Associates conducted a nationwide telephone survey for the Cellular Telecommunications Industry Association A representative sample of 1004 mobile phone users were surveyed. Prevention Magazine conducted surveys in 1994 and 1995, with approximately 1260 responden t s in each survey. The magazine reported that the survey was a representative samp l e of national demographics. The Motor Vehicle Occupant Safety Survey was conducted by National Highway Traffic Safety Association (NHTSA) from November 1996 to January 1997 This te l ephone survey included 4,022 respondents randomly selected from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. 2 2 D emographic.s of Mobil e Phone Users Tables 2,3, and 4 consider age, income, employment, and education as demographic factors related to mobi l e phone use. 3


Table 2: Age of Mobile Phone Users .: .. '/( ;: : ;., .. -Associates(,; - ,:.!i, Age of Respond_cnts .. . 1991'-'-' ..,,,1 .2'P:#if ; , t .... y;.. 18-2 4 6% 6% 3!% 25-34 26% 30% 35-44 34% 30% 27% 45-54 20% 23% 26% 55-59 t 6% 3% 60 or o lder 4% 8% 15% No response 3% 0% Source. Motorol a Cellular Impact Sur\ C:y> Pc1er D Hart Rese.arch Assoc1ates Survey Table 3: I n come of Mobile Phone Users 1 .. -;./. i:t<. (.."i ,t; .............. .-,;o : . '"'" 1993 ... ;o;i;;.,, Less than $25,000 NIA 15% $25 ,000-$4 4, 999 30% 27% $45,000 $59 999 20% 16% $60,000-$74,999 14% 7% $75,000 or over 16% 28% Source. Motorola Cellular Impact Survey Table 4: Employment Status of Mobile Phone Users EriijiloytrierifStatus :of,, ;'.:" \s1'.-..'< ..,;,.., ,, .... r .. ''!JV.t:\, .,. ... ( }. .. .. """' 1:i4';1 _ pnts .. ;,'1 991 "11 ... -----. (iii, yz. FullTime 83% 78% Part-Time 6% 5% Homemaker II% 4% Self-Emp loye d N/A 4% Retired NIA 5% Source: Motorola Cellu l a r Impact Survey 4


Table 5 shows that in 1990/199 1 most mobile phones were used for business purposes. The surveys in 199311994 showed that more phones were being purchased for personal use and by 1998 personal use was the dominant type of use This is a trend tha t is expected to continue as phones become increasingly inexpensive and therefore more attractive to the general public for n on-business purposes. Mobile phone provider s also have incr eased the number of paymen t plans that allow users a c erta in number of free minu tes of use per month Peter D. Hart Research Associates compared mobile phone usage in standard demographic groupings with the nationa l averages of the same gro u pings. The results of this a nalysis and examination of the informa t ion in the tables presen ted here shows t hat the e xpansion of wireless p ho ne use to all segmen t s of society has created a market that demographically resembles the U.S. population." (Hart, 1998) Table 5: Purpose of Mobile Phone Calls Associates Survey 2.3 Mobile Phone Usage While Driving Tab l e 6 presents the results o f the Prevention Magazine survey (1995) that asked mobile phone users how often they use their mobile phones while driving Approximately 60 percen t of respondents indicated that they use their car phone while d ri ving either very few times or never 5


. Table 6: Frequency of Mobile Phone Usage While Dri ving .. :t.!'::' r. .. , : .-f1"! .. t ,. Most trips 17% Abou t half 10% Less t h an half 12% Very few 46% Neve r 15% ource: Preven uon Maoazine Surve y Results from a s i milar survey by NH T SA (Goodman, 1997) are shown be low in Table 7. S iKtyfive percent of respondents i n dicated that they used their phones while driving either very f ew times or nev e r which is consistent with the P revention Magazine S urvey Males se e m to use the i r p hon es while driving more fr e quently than fem ales The difficu lt ies a n d subsequent uncertainties associated with collecting data on mobile ph one usage sho uld be considered when viewing Table 7. Peop l e may be unwilling to s t ate t h at t h e y use their mobile p h ones while driving which may affect the a ccuracy of th ese survey results. Table 7: Frequency of Mobile Phone Usage While Driving -" .">: : W;; Do;>15u talk .on 'lhe, lllioiie .' .;,,.,,.,;., .. -.i(r'!fi. .. ::_" .. '.< ,. ,. .: ;o .:. .. Male Fem ale Total Mosttrips 16% 5% 1 1 % About half 10% 9% 9% Less t han half 17% 12% 15% Very few 49% 59% 54% Never 7% 14% 11% Source. NHTSA Mo1o r Veh1cle Occupa n l Survey 6


2.4 Safety Benefits One majof reason for the purchase of a mobile phone is the perceived increased safety benefits, as shown in Table 8. This table, pan of the Motorola Cellular Impact Survey, shows the frequency of mob ile phone usage for safety purposes and the pefceived imponance of having a phone available for this purpose. Table 8: Usage of Mobile Phones for Safety Reasons safety Be .nefitS Called for help for another's disabled vehicle 3&% 40% Called for help for own disa bled vehicle 25% 39% Called for assistance for own medical emergency 7% 1 3% Called for assistance for another's medical emergen cy 23% 28% Called police to warn of haz a rdous road conditions 24% 28% Considered buying another cell phone for other family members N/A S2% as safety precaution Have purchased an additional phone for other family member as N/A 28% safety precaution Encourage teenagers to use phone while out at n i ght N/A 26% Source. Mocorota Cellu lar Impact Survey T his tabl e indicates that there is a broad fange of perceived safety benefits available to mobile phone users; many in the survey have used theif mobile phone fof seve fal of the safety purposes. It a ls o indicates that a lafg e pwportion have purchased and used their phones for this reason. It is probable that these benefits are a major reaso n for the growth i n non-business usage. 2.5 Emergency Response A perceived major benefit of carrying a mobile phone in a vehicle is the ability to call for assistance in an emerge ncy. The number of wifeless 911 and distress calls has risen steadily, in keeping with increases in mobile phone ownership. T he number of annual nationwide wire les s 911 and distress calls was 193,000 in 1985 and has risen t o 30,500,000 in 1997 (Cellular T elecommunications Industry 7


Association 1997). Emergency respOnse service providers and law enforcem ent agents recognize the benefits that the improved communica tion links provide. I f a person in an accident does not have a mobile phone to call 911, other motorists on the road see the accident and the distress call is made indirectly. The problem with mobile phones is that the emergency call centers cannot pinpoint the distress call loca tio n, as can b e done with land line distress calls. This is a problem ifthe caller i s unaware of his or her location Technology is available to allow the location of mobile phones to be tracked, but implementation is difficult due to pdvacy implications. In 1996 the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking which proposed tha t by April 1998, "all cellular carriers must be able to relay a caller's Automatic Number Identification (ANI) and the loca tion of the base station or cell site to the designated Public Safe ty Answering Point (PSAP) for a 911 call" (Goodman, 1997) In March 1999 the FCC, were still in the process of finalizing this reg u lation (http:!/, 1999). Further applications i n emergency response technology are c onsidered in Section 6 of this report. Another problem with mobile distress calls i s the sheer vo l ume that can flood call centers in the aftermath of an accident on a busy roadway. This scenario endangers people involved in accidents elsewhere who cannot get through t o the call center. The ease of calling this toll free number on a mo bil e phone has res ulted i n people dialing 911 to ask for directions or test the operation of the phone. Some states have established Emergency Communication Centers t o deal with large vo lu mes of mobile 911 calls (Goodman, 1997) 8


3. Published Research Research literature on the use of mobile phones while driving can be divided into three main categories: on-road studies, simulator s tud ies, and epidemiological studies. Each type has contributed t o understanding of the issu es and notab l e studies from each area are summarized below. 3.1 On-Road Studies This category covers the studi es undertaken on actual roads in real world conditions and as such are of great value. Using simulators always carr ies the risk of not sufficiently replicating real world condit i ons and therefore not providing relevant results. On-road studies are based on "real world" conditions. 3.1.1 ''The Effects of Mobile Telephoning on Driving Performance" (Brookhuis, et al., 1991) The objective of the project was to study the effects of driving while telephoning in t hree different traffic conditions while following another vehicle, in order to regulate the "traffic l oad." These conditions were light traffic on a quiet roadway, hea vy traffic on a four-lane ring road, and in-city traffic. The study used 12 subjects, 10 male and 2 female, who drove an instru mented Volvo 245 GLD for an hour e ach day for three weeks and operat ed a mobile telephone for a short period of each trip. One half of the subjects u sed a hand-held phone while the other half used a hands-free phone, and subjects were asked to place and receive calls. The age of participants was evenly spaced between 23 and 65. The telephone conversation consis t ed of a three-minute combination of memory and addition te sting The ve h icl e measured lane tracking, steering wheel movements, speed, following distance, driver rear view mirror checking, and driver pulse rate. Study Results arid Findings Talking on a mobile phone decreased the standard deviation of lateral position or "swe r ving," particularly while driving on a quiet roadway. 9


Talking on the mobile phone delayed adap tion to speed variation of the followed car by 600msec. Steering wheel standard deviation was considerab l y greater when using a mobile phone during city driving, particularly when placing and receiving calls o n the handheld phones. Mobile phone use while driving g enera lly did not affect rear-view mirror checking Drivers' mental workload increased while undertaking the telepho n e task; no measurable difference was detected for the alternative driving condi ti ons of phone types. Success in t he telep hone task increased significantly over the study period, indicating a learning effect. No age variance in performance of the different age groups was detected. 3.1.2 "Effects of Handsfrce Telephone Use on Driving Behavior" (Fa i rclough, et al., 1991) The study required subjects to drive an experimental vehicle in a real road environment under three different experimental conditions The three conditions were a conversation on a car phone (hands f ree), a conversation with a passenger, and t he control condition of no conve r sation. Twenty four subjects were chosen t o participate, of which none were regu la r car phone users. The route was a one mile circu i t of single lane roads. Results and Swdy Findings Speaking wh il e driving exerts a higher mental workload than driving alone and induced incre ased task effort and frustration. Time taken to complete t he route was around I 0 percent longer unde r speaking conditions. Heart rate was s i gnificant l y higher in the car p h one condition than either the passenger or control conditions. Thls could either hav e been caused by the inexperience of using a car phone or could indicate t h at a car phone


conversation is fundamentally more deman ding tha n a passenger conve rsa tio n. Other studies have found tha t these two ty p e s of conversation are different i n the complete a bse nc e of"social cues" i n car phone conversations, and also that the presence of a pass enger i n c r ease s the d rivers awareness of their o wn driv in g standards. 3.2 Simulator Studies 3. 2. 1 "Changes in D river Behavior as a Function of Handsfree Mobile Phones" (Aim. etal., t 991) This study assessed the effect of a bands free t el e phone conversat ion on the driver's react ion tim e, lane position, speed l e vel, and workload during easy a nd hard d r iv ing conditions. Fony subjects were randomly assigned to fo ur experim enta l condi tions on tes t routes 80km long Duri ng the easy driving t a sk, the telep h one conversation w as given the highest priority. This mean t that the telephone task was completed succ essfully while driving per forman ce deteriorated slightly. During the hard driving task, the driving was given hig hes t p r iority and therefore driving was better t h a n un der the easy driving task but the telep hone performa nce reduced Srudy Resulrs and Findings Reaction time was sig niftcantly i n creased by phon e use du rin g th e easy drivi n g condition, but th ere was no effect whe n using the phone d u ring the hard d riving cond it ion Phone use increased lat e ral pos it ion deviat io n ; the harder the dr iving task, the greater the lat era l deviation. A higher mental work load was imposed on the driver by phone use, but the workload was u naffe cted b y the complexity of the driving task. Phone us e had the effect of r educing d rive r s p eed. 1 I


3.2.2 "The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention" (McKnight, 1991) The objective of this study was t o the use of mobile phones as a possible driving distraction. There were 151 part ici pants in the study, which used a video driving sequence containing 47 different traffic situations. Five conditions of distraction were tested: p lacing a mobile phone call carrying out a simple mobile phone conversation } carrying out a complex mobile phone conversation, tuning a radio, and no distraction. Distraction was measured by comparing response occurrence and response time under the test conditions with the comparable respons es with no distraction. Study Results and Conclusions The three tasks involved in mobile phone use placing calls simp le conversations and comp le x conversations all increased the time required to respond t o highway traffic conditions, by between 0.3 a n d 0.85 seconds. Complex conversations induced the largest reaction time increases, which w ere equivalent to tuning a radio Placing a call and undertaking a simple conversation were found to be less distracting than tuning a radio Age was found to have an influential effect on the amount of distraction incurred. The proportion of drivers over 50 years old who failed to respond to traffic situations whi le using mobi l e phones was two to three times larger than younger drivers, with the act o f placing the call being the most difficult for older drivers. Prior expe rien ce with mobi le phones was found to be unrelated to the degree of distraction. 12


3;3 Epidemiological Studies These studies use the epidemiological method of assessing accident risk while using a phone while driving. The technique was origi na lly designed to assess the risk of infection of a person exposed to a disease. In t hls case, the te<:hnique is used to assess the risk of "exposure" to an ac<:ident if using a mobile phone as opposed to the risk while not using one. A major benefit o f the techni que is that each study participant serves as their own control, so the effect of using the phone is directly determined Some of the more important studies are described below. 3.3.1 "Association between Cellular Telephone Calls and Motor Vehicle Collisions ' Of all the studies undertaken on thi s topic, this one by Redelmeier ( 1997) has r eceived the most attention from both legislato rs and the media and ha s been most effective in bringing the issue int o the public domain. T he study uses an epidem iological method, case crossover design, to evaluate whet her using a mobile phone while driv ing increases the risk of a motor vehlcle collision. The study participants were people who reported to the New York Collision Reporting Center betwee n 711/94 and 8/31195 and were included if they consented to participate and the collision r esu l ted in subs t antial property damage. Accidents involving injury or criminal activity are n ot dealt v.oith by the center. People were excluded from the study if they did not have a mobile phone or the ir billing records could not be located. A to tal of 699 subjects were eventually selected to participate in the s t u d y. T eleph one records were collected and the time of accident estimated from the subject statem ent, police records and the billing records. If these three sources ma t ched, the time of th e accident was said to be exact. The phone activity during the c ollision time period was compared with the sam e time period of another control day to see if there was an association between phone use and accident risk. Contro l days used were the preceding day 13


same day proceeding week, day of similar phone act ivity and period of most mobile phone use. Results and Study Findings Average mont h ly bill was $72 compared with the national average of$51. Twenty-four perc e nt of participants used their mobile phone i n the 10 mi n utes before the crash Thirty-nine percent of drivers called emergency services following the collision. Using a mobile p h one while driving is associated with an approximately four fo l d increase in risk compa red with not using the phone; this is similar to the risk of dri v ing with a b lood a lcoho l l evel a t the legal limit. Hand free p h ones are no safer th an hand-held phones. Younger drivers were found to be at more risk than older d riv ers. High speed crash es are more likely than low speed crashes 14


3.3.2 "Cellular Phones and Fatal Traffic Collisions" (Violanti, 1998) This case control stud y was con ducted to detennine statistical associations between traffic fatalities and the or presence of a mobile phone. The study used data from the Oklahoma State Department of Public Safety database as the police standardized accident reports include a "check box" to indicate the presence and/or use of a mobile phone. The reports were filed between 1992 and 1995. Srudy Resulrs and Findings Total traffic related accide n ts were 233,000, of which 1,548 were fatal. Of the vehicles involved in fatal accidents, 4.2 percent had mobile phones and 7. 7 percen t of the fatalities with phon es present were reported to be using the phone at the t i me of collision. Drivers reported to be using a phone at the time of collision had a nine-fold risk of a fatality ove r those without a phone. Drivers reported to have a phone pre sent in their vehicle were at twice the risk for a fatality as drivers without phones Drivers with phones were more likely to incur a c ollis ion due to "wandering" from their lane Drivers with p hones had a i ncreased chance of striking a pedestrian. Drivers with phones had a n increased risk of overturning their vehicle. Drivers using phones were at three times the risk of a fatality over alcohol/drug use. Res u lts sug gest tha t phone use is associated with driver inattentiveness to speed and lane position Ris k of phone involved fatalities increase with age. 15


3.3.3 "Cellular Phones and Traffic Accidents: An Epidemiological Approach" (Violanti 1996) The objective of this study was to examine the association between mobile phone use and treffic accident ris k using epidemiological case control design and logistic regression techniques. The study divided its subjects into a case group and control group, with I 00 drivers in each group. The case group consisted of New York State drivers who had a "reportable" accident ($1 ,000 p roperty damage or personal inj u ry) in 1992-93 The control g roup consisted of a random sample of New York State drivers who were accident-free w i thin the las t 10 years The epidemiolo gical method allowed the study to focus on the presence of risk factors associated with traffic accidents. Study Results and Findings An in creased crash risk of 34 percent existed for those with mo b i le phones in their cars. Talking for more than fifty minutes per month r esulted in a 5.58 fo l d increased risk of having a crash, higher than any other in car activity. People in the case (acciden t ) group used their mobile phones twice as much as peopl e in the contro l (no accident) group and engaged in conside r ably more business and intense call s. 3.4 General Studies 3.4. 1 "An Investigati on of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles" (NHTSA, t997) This report is an extensive review of the issues surrounding mobile phone use while driving. It contains summaries and discussion into a lmost all of the research done on this issue up to 1997. The report objective is to assess whether mobil e phone use while driving increases the crash risk and to assess the magnitude of t raffic safety problem due to this behavior. The report also 16


discusses the future prob lems if current trends continue and explores ways to maximize safe usage by drivers. Srudy Findings Using a mobile phone does increase the risk of a crash but the amount of increased risk was hard to quantify and may depend ou other driver-related variables besides mobile phone usage. The nationa l magnitude of the problem was found to be unquantifiable due to the absence of mobile phone use in police cr ash data reports. The report predicted that the number of crashes due to mobi le phone usage would increase in the future as the number of mobile phone users increased. There is a large scope for improving the safety of mobile phone usage, both through driver education to increase awareness of the dangers involved and through tec!mological advances to create ergonomically sound mobile phones. 3.5 Summary of Research Literature Findings 3.5.1 Quantifying Crash Risk From the research studies described above, assessing and quantifYing the effects of mobile phone use on drivi n g and crash risk is a complex task The epidemiological s tudies are useful as a source of quantifiable statistics on the risks associated with mobile phone use while driving Th e accuracy of these predictions depends on the quality of the data and the validity of these relatively new tec!mi ques and, in this respect, th e validity of using epidemiological methods can be questioned. However, in the a bsence of p olice crash reports detailing mobile phone usage, this is the only method currently available for any quantifiable crash risk analysis. These studies all find that there is a significant risk Redel meier ( 1997) states a quadntpling of the risk, while Vio lan ti (I 996) finds a 34 percent increase in risk.


3.5.2 Effect of Mobile Phone Use on Driver Behavior Aside fro m quantifying crash risk, all the studies mentioned are u s eful in assessing how mobile phone use affects general driving behavior. Repeated findings include adverse effects ondriver react ion time, mental workload vehicle lane position all pointing t owards the distracting nature of mobile phone use. In comparing mobile phone use with other in car activities, Violanti (1996) found that mobile phone use was most distracting if used for more than fifty minutes per month. In contrast, M cKnigh t ( 1991) found mobile phone use to be no more dangero us than tuni ng a radio. Considering the physical and mental activity required by mobile phones, it appears that this activity is one o f the most distracting i n car activities that is possible to carry out whil e driving. Even if only as distracting as tuning a radio, the actual exposure t o accident risk is significantly higher due to the greater leng ths of time spent on the phone compared to tuning the radio. 3.5.3 Hands-Free Versus Hand-Held Mobile Phone Usage Assuming mobile phone use is associated with increased crash risk, some types of behavior appear to be at more risk than others. Research suggests that bands-free us e is less dangerous than hand -he ld use due to the removal of.,physica l distraction" w hil e placing and receiving calls. However, r esearc h comparisons of hand-held and hands-free phones shows that there is little difference in risk during the act of conversation due to the continued presence of a mental distraction. 3.5.4 Effect ofType of Conversation on Crash Risk Research bas shov,n t hat the type of conversation is s ignifican t in determining crash risk. Violanti (19 96) found that mobile phone users engaging in in tense or business conversations were more likely to have a crash while McKnight (1991) found that complex conversations were t he most dangerous phone-related activity. The general finding that engaging i n a simple conversation is relatively risk-free compared to engaging in an intense conversat ion was a finding of several studies. lR


A possible explanation for this is given in Alm ( 1990), whereby phone use and driv ing are parallel tasks competing for the drivers attention. If the driving task or phone task is simple, the driver can easily accommodate one or the oth e r but not both if they a re difficult. 3 5.5 Effect of Age on Crash Risk On this issue, many of th e studies exhibit conflicting findings. The epidemiological studies generally find that younger drivers are mor e at risk, while the on-road and simulato r studies tend t o find that older driver s are more suscep tible to a mobile phone-related crash. Given that the mobile phone's main effect is distract ion of the d river with resulting de trimen tal effects on reaction t ime and attention to road conditions, it would appear that older people, with their a lre ady-reduced reaction abilities, are more at risk from mobile phone use. The fact that young people a p pear more at risk in the epide mio lo gic a l studies suggests that the crashes experienced by mobile phone users may be more due to factors o th er than mobile phone use. 19


4. Existing Crash Da t a At present, t here are two nation al crash data bas e s that gather data on motor vehicle colli s ions in the U.S., the F atal Ana lys is Reporting System (FARS) and Nationa l Automotive Samp ling System (N ASS ) Both these databas es use police crash r eport data as a source of i nfor mat ion. With the exce ption of Oklahoma and Minnesota, no state pol ice repo rt s include a spe cific "ch ec k box" for mob il e phones In most s tat es, the only way in which m ob ile pho ne use can be coded into t h e data ba ses is if they are men ti oned in the narr a tive descript ion of the crash, found at t h e end of th e report (Goodman, 1997) 4.1 FARS Database This i s a census of all moto r -ve h icle-related fatalities tha t are recorde d b y police cras h reports approximat e ly 40,0 00 deaths every year. Mo bile teleph one use was included a s a possible driver-related fa ctor beginning i n 19 94. A major p ro blem with F ARS i s that data i s skewed due to the way th e Oklahoma data ha ve been coded In thi s stat e, a t ick i n the mobil e t elephone ins tall a tion" box ha s bee n taken to i n dicate a mobile telephone-rela ted crash. Fu rthe r analysis of the data showed that less tha n I 0 percent of the Oklahoma crashes were actually mobile-ph onerelated Experience with the Oklahoma data bas s hown that even with check boxes included in the report, correct coding of mobile p ho ne related crashes is not straigh t forward The NHTSA study (Good man, 1997) (see Sect ion 3.4) ha s take n account of thi s anomaly in its analysis and is confident that the data from the oth c r states are accura t e l y coded. Studies of the FARS data from 1994 and 1995 shows that, in most-mobile-phone r elated crashes the driver of the striking vehicle was using a mob il e phon e and that most o f these c rash e s involved coll isions with o ther vehicles (Goodman, 199 7) Furth er analysis of the c a us es of mob ile phone rela ted crashes h as shown that t he mai n r easons for the crashes has been dri ve r inattention, driving too fast and r unning off the road Driver in atte n tio n ha s a particularly strong correlation 20


with mobile-phone-related crashes, with a fivefold increase in likelihood over the F ARS average (Goodman, 1997). 4.2 NASS Database This database uses trained researchers to investigate a stratified random sample of all motor vehicle crashes i n the U.S., around 5,000 crashes each year. The database incorporates the police crash reports with interviews of the drivers and passengers of the vehicles involved Analysis of 1995 data showed that eight crashes out of 4,555 (0.18 percent) involved a mobile phone and that a common factor of each of these crashes was driver inattention. Applying weighting factors to the sample, the eigh t crashes are representative of3,837 national mobile phone related crashes (Goodman, 1997). 4.3 Oklahoma Crasl\ Data As mentioned earlier in section 5 .1, Oklahoma and Minnesota are unique in their collec t ion of mobile phone specific crash data. However, in Minn esota the check box is underutilized (see Se ct ion 4.4) so Oklahoma is the only state collecting usable data. Oklahoma started its collection of mobile-phone-related crash data in 1992. The police crash r eport contains check boxes for "phone installed" and "phone in use," with officers trained to look for the presence of a mobile phone at the scene of the crash. If a mobile phone is seen to be installed in the vehi cle, then the driver is asked if i t was being used a t the time of the crash. The first problem with this method is that a mobile phone is noted as present only if it is i ns talled in the car. Three -q uarters of all mobile phones are handheld and would not be noted u nde r this system. The second problem is that drivers at fault in the crash would be reluctant t o state that they were us ing their mobile phone during this ti m e. These problems s uggest the potential for under-reporting of instances of mobile phone use A further problem is that the type of usage is not defined, and, therefore there is no means of assessing which of the acts of dialing, r eceiving a call, or talki ng are the most hazardous. 21


Bearing in mind thes e proble ms, analysis of the Oklahoma data showed that a pproximately I 0 percent of telephones known to b e in vehicles were in use a t the time of the crash Table 8 shows a comparison of the contrib uting causes of all Oklahoma collis ions with the contributing causes of crashes invo lv ing mob ile phones. A similar trend to the F ARS database is observed with driver inattent io n far more p rev alent among mob ile-phone related cra s hes (Goodman, 1997) Table 9: Contributing Causes of Oklahoma Collisions, 1992-1994 .. : ,1ff ('llo) ; : l\ici.hll e u . .. "'i o< . Failed to yield 19 15 Followed too closely 11 13 Unsa fe speed 12 6 Impro per turn I I 10 Changed Janes unsafely 5 6 Stopped in traffic lan e 0 I Failed t o stop 7 6 U nsafe vehicle 2 I Left of center 2 2 Improper overtaking 0 I Improper park ing 2 0 Inatte n t ion 9 17 DUI 4 7 Other 16 IS Source. Annual Oklahoma Traffic Acc1dent Fac t s Report 4.4 Minnesota Crash Data Minnesota police crash reports have included a check box for "driv e r on car phone/CB/2-way r adio" as a contributing crash cause since 1991 (Goodman, 1997). Sinc e this time, the n u mb e r of citations inc l uding this contr ib uting cause has been insignificant and has often been g rouped in with other "miscellaneous factors It is thought that the r eas on for this unusually low occurrence rate is t hat contr ibu ting cause fact ors are ob t ained from interviews wi t h involved parties, wit h mobile phone use being difficult to detect (Goodman, 1 997) 2 2


4 5 Japanese Crash Data Data released from the N ationa l Police Agency of Japan gives analysis of car phone related traffic accidents in l 997 and 1998. Table 9 shows the total number of car phone related acc ident s. Table 10 : Traffic Accidents While the Driver is Using a Mobile Phone 4::. .. .. 1 997 .' ' ..... ., . o ..... Number of Accidents 1122 1248 11.2 Fatalities I l 22 50 Injuries 1624 1793 10.4 Source. National Pohce Agency o f Japan These accidents represent 0.34 percent of all accidents in Japan (National Police Agency of Japan, l 998) Further analysis of these dat a was undertaken t o assess which types of use were more dangerous. Table I 0 shows the results of this analysis. Table 11: Type of Mobile Phone Activity in Progress when Crash Occurred Calling/Operating Rc:cei v il)g Cal Is_:, .. \ ' ' \\'{ .... ,; ,OtheiS :: ' # % # % # % # % 286 22. 9 537 43 208 1 6.7 217 l 7.4 . Source. Traffic PJannmg Depanment, Nattonal Poll ee Agency of Japan Table l 0 shows that the most haza r dous activity associated wi th mobile phone use is receiving a call. This is a rather surprising s t atistic, as receiving a call does not require t he sa me ddver workload as placing a call or talk ing on the p ho n e The fact that the ddver cannot choose the time when a call is re ceived per h aps introduces the e lement of danger into thi s activity. Additiona l data analysis showed that, by far, the most common type of mobile phone re lated accident is a r ea r -en d collision, accounting for 76.3 percent of all ac c idents. The age gro u p most likely to h ave a mobile-phone-related accident i s 23


the 16 to 24 year o lds (31.8 p ercent), while people over-50 years old accounted for less than l 0 perce n t of all accidents. Also, males are more likely t o have a mobile p hone -re l a ted accident; 77.6 percent of the to tal number of crashes involved male drivers (Nati onal P olice Agency of Japan, 1998). 4.6 Summary This sect ion has d escribed the existing data available for mobile-phone-related crashes. In the U .S the two n a tiona l databases FARS and NASS, make use of police crash reports as the basis of their data. The l ack of a specifi c mobile p hone us e ele m ent to these crash reports i ndicate s the probab i lity ofunderreporting mobile-phone-related accidents The difficulty in determining accurately whether a mobile phone was in use a t the t ime of t he accident means that providing a check box in crash reports does n o t solve the problem, which has bee n shown with the analysis of the Oklahoma dat a Clea rly it may be very diffi c ult t o design a police c rash report that prov id es accurate, unbiased r esults on mobile phone usage, b ut t h is is w hat wou ld be requ i re d to obtain irrefutab l e knowledge of the extent of the acci d ent risk assoc i a te d with usin g a mobile phone while driving. The methods used in Ja pan, wher e the required data appear to b e availa ble may need to be considered when d es igning a d a t a collec tio n s ystem for the U S In summarizing the vario u s sourc es of data available, it appears that most mobile phone-rela ted crashes occur due t o drive rs mov ing from their lane or collid ing wi t h a s t opped veh i cle in their lane, mai n l y due to inattention t o the driv ing tas k. These general findings are strikingly similar to the findings of the research s t u d ies summarized i n Sec t ion 4. There is a rea l nee d for concise c rash data collection to assess the magnitude of the p ro blem and to derive potential solutions. To do this polic e c rash reports should include a carefully-de signed mobile phone use e lement, and invest i gat ing officers should have the nece ssary awareness and training t o c omplete this element correct ly. 24


5. Safe Use of Mobile Phones while Driving Assuming that wireless communication technology will be increasingly available to drivers in the future, it is essential that drivers know how to use their mobile phone safely. The Cellula r Telecommunications Industry Association (CTIA) has put cons iderable effort into getting the "safe use" message across using its campaign "Safety: Your Most Important Call" (CTIA, 1998). The. campaign's central message is that it is a driver's first responsibility to drive safely and inclu des 10 points to consider when using a mobile phone while driving. These are: I. Get to know your phone and its features such as speed dial and red ial. 2. When available, use a hands-free device. 3. Position your phone within easy reach. 4. Let the person you are speaking with know you are driving; if necessary, suspend the call in heavy traffic or hazardous weather co ndit ions 5 Do n ot take notes or look up phone numbers while driving. 6. Dial sensibly and assess the traffic situation; if possible, place calls when you are not moving or before pulling into traffic 7. Do not engage in stressful or emotional conversations that may divert your attention from the road. 8. Use your phone to call for help. 9. Use your phone to help others in emergencies. I 0. Call roadside assistance or a special non-e mergency wireless number when necessary. All of these points are good advice and increase th e safety of drivers and other road uses around them. They take into account the fmdings of several studies mentioned in Section 3 by warning against c a lling when already under a heavy driving workload and e ngagi ng in stressful and emo tional conversations. The r ecommenda t ions to use a hands-free device, place calls when not moving, and 25


suspending c all s i n heavy traffic or hazardous weathe r conditions are also good advice. Howe ver, it may be unrealis tic to expect these to be followed by the majority of use rs without some method of enfo rcement. Also it may be unwise to promote the notion of th e hands-free dev i c e being "safe in ligh t of the Ne w England Journal of Medicine art ic le (Redelmeier, 1 997) that states that this may not be any safer than the hand-held device. The main problem in this field is getting the safe u se messag e across to the p eopl e who use or p la n to u se their phones while driving. In New Y ork Sta te, legislation has been proposed requiri ng that a warning sticker be placed on the handset by t h e manufacturer, informing of the danger s involv e d in usag e w hile driving (S e cti on 7) Aside from this legis l ation a government -b acked n a ti onal campaign i nvo lving TV o r o t he r forms of mass media advertising to pro mote the s afe u se of mobile phones while driving may prov e extrem ely beneficial. Addi ti onal education in this field is a p ri macy concern and can begin immediately to save liv es and incr ease safety 26


6. New Technology 6.1 Introduction There is an almost limitles s potential for new technology in the field of wireless communicati ons Already, mobile phones are being used to operate portable faxes, a n d provide e-mail, and Interne t access as the phenomenon of the "mobile office" emerges. The use of these supp lementary items is discussed in this chapter. The use of the mobile phone as a safety device has been well documented and has been taken one step further by the development of Automatic Crash No ti fica t ion (ACN). ACN is des igned to be a direct automatic link to emergency services if the vehicle is involved in a collision Fu rthe r applications of the mobile phone i n Intelligen t Transportation Systems are a l so discussed in addition to an insight into the "programmable" nature of the mobile phone. The concept of an "intelligent answerphone" is also addressed. 6.2 Incorporation of Mobile Phones in other Communication Devices Mobile phones can be used to link many other devices to the wireless communication network. Many information transfer devices ultimately use p hones to transport data. Faxes, e-mail and the Internet all use phone lines for access Since the wireless communication network carries out the same task as trad itiona l phone lines, it is natural that mobile phones be used to make these supplementary devices mobile Mobile phones incorporating these additional functions are on the market at p r esent, but it is unc lear what number are in use. The q u estion of the safety of using these devices while driving is outside the scope of this study and is currently being assessed by the NHTSA Research Team. 6.3 Automated Collision N otification (ACN) Research has sho wn that one o f the mai n reasons for having a mobile phone in a vehicle is safety. People know that i f their vehicle breaks down or they are involved in an accident, help is only a call away. 1be application of this concept 27


is taken one step further by ACN technology. This is part of a general ITS initiative called Advanced Emergency Response Services. The purpose of ACN is to automatically initiate a wireless 911 call, transmitting data on the severity of the crash, related safety infom1ation, and location of the vehicle (Donnelly, 1997). The syste m requires a vehicle equipped with advanced electronics, sensors and computer systems that can determine engine problems, temperature changes, the vehicle's location and speed levels (Yuan eta!., 1994)). The sensors would detect impact on the vehicle and trigger the portable phone to dial 911 and relay the relevan t information from the car to the appropriate emergency personnel. T h e technology described already exists and is currently being tested by NHTSA. During a road trial, one driver was involved in an actual accident, and the ACN unit coMected the driver directly with emergency persoMel via a universal wireless port as soon as the car sens ors had detected an impact. The role of wireless technology in this lifesaving area of!TS is very valuable and will increase in effectiveness as technology advances. The wider concept of Advanced Emergency Response Services involves the "end-to-end" connection of accident victim a n d suitable emergency service. The objective is to remove from the system the intermediary coMectors between the two "ends" that slow the reaction time to the accident and therefore r educe the effectiveness of the response. 6.4 The Intelligent Answerphone The "intelligent answerphone" is a concept introduced by A.M Parkes in "Driving Future Vehicles" (1993) The intelligent answerphone would increase the safety of using an in-vehicle communicat ion device by only allowing th e driver to converse during safe driving peri ods The answerphon e would receive information from vehicle sensors or visual data and evaluate the driver workload in real time During period s of high workload, the answerphone would alert the d rive r to d riving conditions. In extreme cases, the answerphone would cut off the conversation informing the caller that they would be reconnected shortly and directing the call to the driver's v o icemail. The technology required for such a


system is still a long way from being available to the general p u blic and will require advances in s everal fields of!TS (Goodman, 1997) 29


7. Legislation 7. 1 Introduction As with many new technologies, there is little or no legislation i\ place to define the individual's use of mobile phones. A formal assessment of what actions should and should not be undertaken while using a mobile phone does not exist and, therefore, the question is left to the discretion of each individual mobile phone user The need to legislate mobile phone use cannot be considered until there is a clear, quantifiable understanding of the relative risks invo lved. Legislation on th i s issue has been proposed in a number of states in the U.S but ,as yet, none has progressed to become law. Additionally in a number of other coun t ries, laws are in p lace to restrict the use of mobi le phones while driving. A discussion of the reasons for and i mpact of legislation in these countries is also included. 7.2 Legislation in the United States To date, legislation specific to mobile phone use while drivin g has been proposed in nine sta tes: Ca li fornia Hawaii Illinois Nebraska New Jersey New York Oregon Virginia Washington 10


The state most active l y proposing legislation on this issue is New York, where a var iety of rela ted bills have been introduced by four legislators. A di s cuss ion of the le gislation proposed by four of these legislators is detailed b elow. 7.2.1 New York Legislation Assemblyman Felix Ortiz was the first to propose legisla tion i n the U.S. in February 1997, afte r witnessing a woman crash her car int o a light pole while tal king o n her mobil e pho ne. When he offered assistance to her she s t ated that t he accident would not ha ve occurred if she had not been using her mobile phone. Shortly after the legislation was introduced, the New E ngland J ou rnal of Medicine (Redelmeier 1997) published the study on phone use while driving, which rein forced Ortiz's argumen t and further i ncre ase d h i s media exposu re. To date, Assemblym a n Ortiz ha s introd uced four bills on th is issue Two of the b ill s would prohibit the use of a mobil e o r car phone while d riv ing (both ha nd held a n d hands free), with allowable exceptions including "if the operator is in fear of their life o r that a criminal act m a y be perpetrate d against them or contacting an sy ste m (New York State Bill A05857) The thi rd bill "requires the Department of Motor Vehicles to include information on acc idents involving operator use of cellular or car phone s in its a nnual summary of motor vehicle accidents." (New York State Bill A04587)The fou rth b ill requires manufacturers to affix a warning label on mobil e o r car phones stating that o p erati o n while dr i ving may be dangerous. Mr. Ortiz l i kens t h is issue to seat belt leg isla ti o n which was derided at first by the car industry and the general public but support st eadily grew until the laws we re enacted. A bill introduce d by Senator Sidikman prohibi t s the use of hand-held pho n es while dri vi ng. T he amended bill c onsi ders prosec u tion measures a nd exc eptional usage. T h e offense would be class ifie d as a second a ry traffic offense, similar to 31


driving without a seatbelt, w he reby the offense wou ld not be reported unless the driver was pulled over for anot her offence Evidence of the safety risks associated with phone use while driving was obtained from a number of sources. Research studies cited are Redelmeier (1997), Violanti (1996), and McKnight (1991 ). In addi tion to the studies, the Statement in Support of the bill contains the description of a fatal accident caused by a d river using a mobile phone The supporting Senator's objectives are to raise public consciousness of the issues to promote discussion and to provide a platform for a study in the next session The bill also "tests the water" for support and assesses the need for a law. Senator Weisenberg introd uced a bill requiring that a study be u ndertak e n to assess the need for legislation restricting the use of mobile phones while driving. Evidence of t he need for legi s la t ion is mainly anecdotal evidence, including leuers from constituents who h ad a family member killed in a mobile phone related crash Senator Stavisky has proposed two pieces of legisla tion on this issu e Bill S03270 "prohibits the use of a handheld c ellu lar telep ho ne or cellular car telep h one except in specified circumstances .... ," (New York State Bill S03270) and requires that manufacturers notify users of the prohi bi tion The s e cond piece of leg i s lation "requires police accident report s ind icat e whether cellular or digital PCS telephones were present in vehicles and whether the use of sucb telephones is known or suspected as a contributing factor in such accident." (New York S t ate Bill S05795) The bills are curren t ly under review in the Transportation Comm. ittee. 7 2 .2 California Legislation In Febn>ary 1997, Senator B u rton proposed legislation restricting the use o f mobile phones while driving. The bill prohibited th e use of hand-he ld phones while driving and has recently been dropped by the senator so it was never heard in policy commiuee. "l?


Studies cited by the senator in support of the bill include Redel meier (1997), Brookhuis (1991), McKnight (199 1),-Aim & Hakan (1995), and Brown, et al., (I 969) 7.2.3 U.S. Legislation Summary In analysis of the various attempts at legislation in the U .S., several iss ues become apparent. The justifi cat ion for the legislation comes mainly from the opinion of the legislator proposing the legislation, although in several cases the New England Journal of Medicine article (Rede l meier, 1997) is cited. There is no nationa lly accredited document to prove the connection between mobile phone use and traffic accidents. Second many of the bills focus on the restriction of hand -held mobile phones sugges t i n g that hands-free phones are considered safer, a lth ough it may be that prohibi tin g hand-held phones is just a first step. Third, the fact that no bill has been close t o becoming law suggests that there may be a lack of p ubli c and political support for such legislation, o r that a stro n g mobi le phone i ndustry lobby is preve nt ing the progress of legislation. The similarity of this issue and the se atbelt legis la tion o f the mid-1980s, as suggested by Assemblyman Ortiz, is an interesting point. Is it just a matter of time before t h e support for legislation grows to the level required for implementation? Alternatively, will such legislation come about as the resu l t of civil court case law liability determinations? Once a civil action occurs in w hich a court determines that full or partial liabili ty damages are to be assessed against a defendant due to a court finding of neg li gence stemming from a motor vehicle crash where cellular telephone use was determined to be a contributing factor, insurance companies (for motorists cellular service providers, and cell phone manufacturers Ot importers) may be the final decision maker in forcing leg islation Despite the noted current lack of nationally-accredited documentation of a scientifically valid connection be t ween crashes and cell phone use an investigating officer's simple 33


"driver was using cell phone" notation on a traffic cita tion for failure to yield may be sufficient evidence to bring abou t such a damage award. Hence, while politicians may be reluctant to establish public policy restricting o r limit ing cell phone use co urts and lawyers are not averse to setting case precedent. 7.3 International Experience A number of countries have enacted legislation to res tr ict the use of mobile phones while driving: Australia, Switzerland, I srae l Spain, Portugal, Italy, Brazil, Chile, Sweden and Singapore (Goodman, I 997). The United Kingdom is currently rev iewing the need for specific legislation and, as such, is in a similar pos ition to the U.S Thi s section reviews the legisla t ion in place in some of these countries. 7.3.1 International Laws The Aus tr a l ian sta t e of.Victoria was the first to introduce legi slati on, banning the use of hand-held phones while driving in 1988 This was followed by a similar ban in the state of New South Wales. Since this time, Spain Italy, Israel, Portugal, and Brazil have introduced similar bans, usually focusing on the restriction of hand -he ld phones Spain is partic ular ly strict on enfo r cing this law with Spanish police briefed to look out for illegal usage ; and fines from $80-$800 are regularly issued. Some countries, such as France and Sweden, prefer to restrict phone usage while driving using existing, general legislat i on, while countries such as Germany Austria, and the Netherlands are currently considering legislation to rest r ic t phone use to hands-free units only (Goodman, 1997). 7.3.2 Switzedand Switzerland i s one of the countries where legislation used to restrict phone use while driving is mor e general: "The driver must co nc en tra te on the road and


traffic while driving He or she may not carry out activities while driving which negatively impact the operation of the vehicle." (Verkehrsvegel nve rordnung, 1989) However the regulation s do state that the driver "must not be distracted by radio or other audio devices.'' (Verkehrsvegelnverordnung, 1989) Drivers with car phones must sign a declaration with their i nsurance compa n ies tha t prohibit them from making a call whlle driving. The insurance claim following a crash is reduced if the driver is using their phone at the time of the incident (Stevens, et al., 1997). A fine of a r ound $80 i s issued for the u se of a car phone in a moving vehicle without using a hands f ree device (Ordnungsbussenvero r dnung 1990) 7 .3. 3 United Kingdom The UK does not have any legislation in place at present but phone use while driving is mentioned in Th e Highway Code, a set of guidelines for road users that mus t be teamed as part of driving test req u irements. The Highway Code s ta tes, "Do not use a handheld telephone or microphone while you are driving. Find a safe place to stop first Do not speak into a hands free microphone i f it will take your mind off the road. You must not stop on the hard shoulder of a motorway to answer or make a call, except i n an emergency" (Highway Code 1992.) The issue of mobile phone usc while driving is a curre n t issue of political debate in the UK. Debate in the House of Commons resulted in the commissioning o f a report to review the evidence currently available, completed by the Transport Research L aboratory in November 1997 (Stevens et at., 1997). This r eport con c ludes that mobi l e phones would be unlikely to be a significan t factor in accidents if the following could be ensured: Phones were only used in light traffic conditions. Drivers did not init iate calls unless the numbers were pr eprogrammed. Only routine/casua l conversations were undertaken. A ll drivers used well desig ned hands-free kits. 35


The report does not comment on th e likelihood of these suggestions being adhered to Hands -fr e e phones are recommended due t o studies showing that the distract ion effect of phon e use i s reduced as they are made easier to use (Stevens et al., 1 997) After the report was presented t o the House of Commons, it was decided that a Code of Practice on the use of mobi le p h ones in vehicles should be developed. This is curren tl y at the consultation stage with input from mobile phone companies and motoring interes t s ( h ttp://parliament.the -st a t ionary, 1 998). The report findings arc also being incorporated in the revised edition of The Highway Code. The report does not see the need for specific legislation banning phone use while driving as there are already regulations in place u nder wh ich dangerous phone use may be punished This stance is supported by the Govenunent and th e Association of Chief Police Officers who cite regu lation I 04 of Road Vehicles Regulations 1986, which states that "police can prosecu t e or issue fixed penalty no tices to drivers who do not exerc ise proper control of their vehicles. Use of a mobile phone when driving can also result in prosecution fo r the offense of careless and inconsiderate driving or dangerous driving."(Proceedings of the House of Commons) Thi s view is echoed by police in the U.S. where reckless driving is illegal is all states and careless or inattentive driving i s illegal in some states; police state that t hese existing laws already gives them the power to regula t e dangerous mobile phone usage (Goodman, 1997). 7.4 Comparison of Seatbelt Leg islation and Mobile Phone Legislation There are some similarities betwe e n legislating for mobile phone use while driving and the seatbelt legislation issue of the early 1980s The first seat belts were introduced in t he 1950s but usage was less than 15 percent until the U.S. Departmen t ofTransportation's 1984 ru le on automatic occupant protection. This initiated a wave of legis l ative a ction in 3 1 stat es, and seat belt use increased to around 4 0 percent by 1987. By 1996 seatbelt laws existed in 49 states and average seatbelt usage was 68 percent. (http://NHTSA.DO T .GOV, 19 99).


In the late 1990s the issue has progressed to whether non-compliance should be a secondary or primary offense. In 1997, seat belt law in 36 states is specified as only secondary enforcement, meaning that the offense could only be cited if the driver is stopped for some other traffi c infraction. As of January 1999, 15 states have seat belt u se as a primary enforcement offense (Highwaysafety.Org, 1999). There are several parattels with legislation of mobile phone use while driving. Both cases co uld be defined as "potentiatty" harmful and are relatively subtle in their effect on the driver on a daily basis; therefore, it is difficult to project the importance of compliance. In both cases initial public and political opinion were generally against the need for legislation; it took several years for people to realize the importance of seat belt legislation. The subtle nature of"non-compliance" is such that both issues could be seen as secondary offenses with a low likelih ood of receiving a serious ci t ation for non compliance. Experience from the passage of seat belt legis la tion has shown that if mobile phone legisla t io n is imple men ted it is likely to be introduced in a phased manner. This could mean that the most uns afe types of usage (i f these usage types exist and can be ident ified) cou l d be ta rget ed long before any wide-ranging leg islation is introduc ed. In the case of mobile phone s this could mean an initial restriction placed on hand -he ld phones only. '\7


8. Conclusion Mobile phone usage has increased rapidly over the las t 15 years. As more people use their mobile phones while drivipg, there is an obvious need for extensive and accurate data on the crash risk associated with this practice. Unfortunately, only 2 of the 50 s tates have a data collection program in place, and the accuracy of the data is being questioned. Many studies have been conducted, and thei r results indicate an inc r eased crash risk of between 34 percent and 300 percent if the driver of a vehicle is using a mobil e phone. However muc h la r ger studies usin g "real world" data must be performed before the t r ue risk of mobile phone use while d riving can be assessed. If there were data available on a nationa l scale, it would be possible to evalua t e t he crash risk and also to determine potential solut ions to alleviate or reduce the risk. Once the risks and remedies are known, it will be possib le for legis la tors to assess the need for legislation and enforcement m easures. Without this informatio n, it is difficult to determine the best course of action. The most obvious source of data is the police crash rep orting system s imilar to w hat is currently in exis t ence in Oklahoma and Minnesota. Experience in these two states has shown that the mobile phone use element must be carefu lly inc orporated into the report and utilized by trained investigators in order t o obtain meaningful data. T he speed at which mo bile phones have become ava i lable to a large proportion of the general public has resulted in the safety of such usage left relatively unassessed. Research studies hav e shown that m obile phone use has an adverse effect on driving. Generally, it appears that mobil e phon e use causes driver inattention, which, in tum, causes r eaction time increases, lane deviations, and associated impairments to driving dec i sion making abilities. Drivers need to be made aware of these dangers and their implications so they can make their phone usage safer. People in tend ing to us e their mobile phones while dr iving must be 38


made aware of the need t o avoid intense or emotional mobile phone conversations, mobile phone use during difficult driving conditions, and handheld phones. A national campaign involving mass media could have a positive impact on lessening dangerous usage of mobile phones while driving. Legislators in a number of s tates have introduced legislation prohibiting or curtailing the use if mobile phones while driving. To date, none of these measures has passed. One criticism of the legislation that is introduced is there is a lack of data to support any legisla ti ve action. Alternatively, Jaws may develop through civil court cases where mobile phone users, manufacturers service providers, etc. are found liab le for automobile accidents. In addition to data collection and safety education the role of technology will be important in reducing the cras h risk associated with mobile phones. It is already unnecessary to use a handheld phone and improved ergonomic design is constantly making the mobile phone easier, and presumably safer, to use. The benefits of carrying a mobile phone in a vehicle are many, ranging from the ability to call for assistance when b ro ken down, involved in a crash, or in personal danger, t o the mor e advanced benefits suc h as ACN systems and other future ITS developments. If used carefully, the mobile phone will be an important and productive element of present and future in-v ehicle equipment. 39


REFERENCES Aim, H; and Nilsson, L, "Changes in Driver Behaviour as a F u nction ofHandsfree M obil e Telephones: A Simulator Study Report No 47, DRIVE Project V!OI7 (BERTIE), Oc t ober 1990. Brookhuis, KA, de Vries, G, and de Ward, D, "The Effects of Mobile T elephoning on Driving Performance," Accident Analysi s and Prevention, Vol. 23 No 4 1991. "Building the Wireless Future, Cellular Telecomm unic ations I ndustry Association, Public I nforma t ion Document, 1998. California Sta te Legis l ation web -site, 1998. "Car Phone Related Traffic Accidents During the First Ha l f of 1998," Traffic Planning D epart ment, The National Police Agency of Japan, August 1 998 C e llu lar Telecommunicat ion s Ind ustry Association, "An Investiga t ion of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles," National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT HS 808-635, November 1997 Cellu lar Telecommun i cations Industry Associa t ion, website, hllp:llwww. wow com. com, 1999 Donnelly, B Funke, D, Bell i s, E, Geigel, J, Blatt, and A, Carter A, "The Automated Collision Notification Fie ld Operational Test: Review of Initial Data, Calspan Operat i ons (Ver idian) Buffalo NY & NHTSA, Washington DC, 1997. Fairclough, SH, Ashby MC, Ross, T, and Parkes, AM, "Effec t s o f Handsfree Telephone Use on D r iving Behav i our," Proceedings of the ISATA Conference, Florence, Italy, 1 991. 40


Federa l Communications commission website, hup:llwwwjcc.govl, 1999. Goodman M, Bents FD, Tijerina, L Weirwille, W, Lerner, N, and Bene!, D, "An Invest igation of the Safety Implications of Wireless Communications in Vehicles National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, DOT HS 808-635, 1997. Hart Peter D., and Associates, Th e Evolving Wireless Marketp l ace," http://ww w wow com com, 1998. House of Common s web-site, United Kingdom, hllp : l/www.parliame m. the -s{(Jtionmy offic e .eo. uk, 1998 Insurance Institute for Highway Safety website, http://www.highways cif, 1999. McKnight, AJ, and McKnight, AS, The Effect of Cellular Phone Use Upon Driver Attention, AAA Foundation for Trafjic Safety, January 1991. The Motorola Cellular Impact survey, "Eva luating 10 Years of Cellu lar Ov..nership in America," The Gallup Organization, Inc Princeton, New Jersey, 1993. National Highway Traffic Safety Administra tion websit e 1999. National Police Agency of Japan, "Car-Phone Related Traffic Accidents Durin g the First Half of 1998," 1998. New York State Legis l a tion web-site, htlp:llass e mbly.state.ny. us. Ordnungsbussenverordnung, March 4, 1996, No. 311. AS 1996, p I 075 (I 090) 41


Prevention Magazine, "Auto Safety in America,'' Princeton Survey Research Associates, 1995. Redelmeier DA; Tibshirani RJ, "Association Between Cellular-Telephone Calls and Motor-Vehicle Collis i ons," The New England Journal of Medicine, Vol336, No 7, February 1997. Stevens, A, and Paolo, DAO, TRL Report 318 'The Use of Mob i l e Phones while Driving: A Review", Transport Research Laboratory, United Kingdom, 1997. Verkehrsvegelnverordnung No vember 13 1952, Systematische Sammlund des Amtliche Sammlungdes Bundesrechts (AS), 1989 Violan ti JM, "Cellular Phones and Fatal Traffic Collisions", Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 30, No 4 1998 Violanti, JM, and Marshall, JR, "Cellu lar Phones and Traffic Accidents : An Epidemiological Approach" Accident Analysis and Prevention, Vol. 28, No 2, 1996 Yuan, R.L, Newman, R.W, Young, S.E, Holm, E.D, and Lin J.S, "Technology Alternatives for an Automated Collision Notification System", NHTSA August 1994. 42


Appendix A Samp l e Proposed U.S. L egisla ti on on Limiting/Banning th e Use of Mobile Phones While Driving


SB 1131 Vehicles. BILL NUMBER: SB 11311NTRODUCES 02/28/97 INTRODUCED BY Senator Burton FEBRUARY 28, 1997 A n act to add Section 21700.3 to the Vehicle Code, relating to vehicles. LEGISLATAIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST SB 1131, as introduced, Burton. Vehicles. (I) Existing Jaw makes it a crime for a person to drive vehicles u pon the highways in violation of the Vehicle Code. This bill would prohibit a person from driving a vehicle upon any highway while operating a cellular telephone if the operation of that telephone by the driver requires the driver to hold the telephone in his or her hand. Because a violation of this prohibition would be a crime, the bill would impose a state-mandated local program by creating a new crime. (2) The California Constitution requires the state to reimburse local agencies and school districts for certain costs mandated by the state Statutory provisions establish procedures for making that reimbursement This bill would provide that no reimbursement is required by this act for a specified reason. Vote: majority. Appropriation: no. Fiscal committee: yes. State-mandated local program: yes. SECTION I. Sect ion 21700.3 is added to the Vehicle Code, to read: 21700.3. No person shall drive a vehicle upon any highway while operating a cellular telep hone i f the operation of that telephone by the driver requires the driver to hold the tele phone in his or her hand. SEC. 2. No reimbursement is required by this act pursuant to Section 6 of Article XIIIB of the California Constitution because the only costs that may be incurred by a local agency or school district will be incurred because this act creates a new crime o r infraction, eliminates a crime or infraction, or changes the penalty for a crime or infr act ion within the meaning of Section 17556 of the Government Code, or changes the definition of a crime within the mean ing of Section 6 of Article XliiB of the California Constirutioo. 44


Notwithstanding Section 17580 of the Goverrunent Code, u nless otherwise specified, the provisions of this act shall become operative on the same date that the act takes effect purs u ant to th e California Constitution. MEASURE AUTHOR(S) TOPIC HOUSE LOCATION: LAST J-UST. ACT. DATE LAST HIST. ACTION Rule 56. 3 1 DAYS IN PRINT TITLE CURRENT BILL STATUS S .B. No 1 131 Burton. Vehicles. SEN 02/02/98 Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint 03/31/97 An act to add Section 2 1700.3 to the Vehicle Code, relating t o vehicles. COMPLETE BILL HISTORY BILL NUMBER : S.B. No. 1131 AUTHOR : Burton TOPIC :Vehicles. BILL HISTORY 1998 Feb.2 Returned to Secretary of Senate pursuant to Joint Rule 56. 1997 Apr. 10 Mar. 26 Mar 18 Mar. 3 Mar. I F eb.28 Set, first hearing. Hearing canceled at the request of author. Set for h earing April 15. To Com. O n TRANS. Read first time. From print. May be acted upon on or after March 31. Introduced. To Com. On RLS. for assignment. To print. 45


New York State Bill A05857 All available information for bill A05857, except its text, is supplied in this document. You may jump to a particular item by selecting from the menu below, or you may simply scroll down through this document. To view the bill text, select the last item from the menu below. [Summary) [Actions) [Votes] [Memo) [Text} Summary of Bill A05857 BILL NO A05857A SPONSOR Ortiz COSPNSR Clark, Dinowitz, Seminerio, Denis, Grannis MLTSPNSR Brennan, DiNapoli, Gottfr ied, Greene, Hikind Add S397-c V & T L Prohibits the use of a handheld cellular telephone or cellu lar car telephone whil e operating a motor vehicle except in specified circumstances where the operator is in fear of their life or that a criminal act may be perpetrated again st them or contacting an E911 sys t em; provides a two minute grace period to park vehicle on the side of the road; requ ire s all cellular telephones sold or leased in the state to notify customers of the prohibition. Actions on Bill A05857 BILL NO A05857A 03/04/1997referred to transportation 03/20/J997amend and recommit to transportation 03/20/J997print number 5857a Ol/07/t998referred to transportation 05/05/1998held for consideration in transportation Votes on Bill A05857 Vote record not found for bill A5857 Memo on Bill A05857 BILL NUMBER: A5857A 46


PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: To prevent automobile accidents caused by drivers who are distracted by the use of a cellular phone while operating a motor vehicle. SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: This bill adds a new section 397-c to the vehicle and traffic law, prohibiting the use of a cellular phone by the driver of a motor vehicle while such vehicle is being on a pubHc highway. The bitt expressly exem pts motor vehicle passengers from being subject to this provision. The use of a citizen's band radio by the polke or other public safety agencie s is also not a violation T his bill allows a sixty-second grace period in which the operator of a motor vehicle receiving an i ncoming cellular p h one transmission may pull off the road to a safe location w here he or she may then continue th e telephone co nversa tion I t is a defense to a violation of this bill that the operator of th e v ehicle was alone and u sed t he cellular phone while in fear of his or her life and safety or the perpetration of a crime. In addition, this bill requires th a t afte r enactme n t, any cellular phone sold, leased or r en t ed in New York should have a message affixed to it stating tha t such phone should not be used by a person operating a motor veh icle. Violation of this legislation will be punishable by a fine of fifty dollars for the first offense, one hundred dollars for a second offense within eighteen months of the first violation, and two-hundred dollars for any subsequen t vio lat ions within s u ch eighteen month period. JUSTIFICATION: Distracted drivers endanger traffic safety on the highways o f this state. According to a study conducted at the Unive r sity of Toronto and reported in the New England Journal of Medicine using a c ellular phone while operating a motor vehicle increases the risk of automobile accidents four-fold, the same risk as when a person's blood alcohol level is .I 0 percent. Furthermore, the study found tha t the ris k of accidents do not decrease even when the phone is no t hand-held. This legislation is necessary to discourage such activity due to the danger it imposes to other motorists. The provisions of such law will be clearly labeled o n any car phone so ld, leased or rented in New York so that motorists will have fair warning as to the prohibited activity. In recognition of the fact that cellular phones are useful in some dangerous situations, it is a defense to such violations that the motorist was alone and in fear of his or her safety. T he bill also allows the driver a reasonable time to answ e r an incomi ng call and then pull safely off t he road so as not to pose a threat to other vehicles This bill imposes no penalties on the use of cellular phones by passengers thus it is a minimally intrusive way of discouraging a potent ially hazardous activity. PRIOR LEGISLATION HISTORY: This bill is new for 1997. FISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None. EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect the first day of January next succeeding the date on which it shall have become a law 47


New York S tate Assembly [Welcome Page] [Legislative Information] [Bill Searches] New York State Bill A04547 All available information for bill A04547, except its t e xt, is supplied in this document. You may jump to a particular item by selecting from the menu below, or you may simply scroll down through this document. To view the bill text, select the last item from the menu be low. (Surnmarv] (Act ions] (Votes] [Memo] [Text] Summary of Bill A04547 BILL NO A04547 SPONSOR Ortiz COSPNSR ML TSPNSR Clark Add 8399-x, Gen Bus L; addS I 199, V & T L Requires manufacturers affix warning label on cellular phones or ca r phones tbat use while opera tin g a motor vehicle may be dangerous; provides that violation shall be punishable by a fine o f not more than $150 for first offense and $250 for each 5Ubsequent offense. Actions oo Bill A04547 BILL NO A04547 02/2011 997referred to consumer affairs and protection 01107/1998referred to consu m e r affairs and protection Votes on Bill A04547 Vote record not found for bill A4547 Memo on Bill A04547 BILL NUMBER: A4547 48


PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: The purpose of this bill is to require t hat manufacturers affix warning labels on packaging of cellular p h ones or car phones that use while opera t ing a motor vehicle may be dangerous. SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: This bill would add a new section to the general business law, Section 399 x requiring the manufacturer of any cellular telep hone or c a r phone to affix to the packaging of such cellular telephones/car phones a warning label concerning the dangers of using such phone while operating a motor vehicle and provides for penalties when in violation of this measure. This bill would also amend the vehicle and traffic law by adding a new Section 1199 requiring the Commissioner of Motor Vehicl e to address thi s issue t hrough public i n format io n and traffic safety publications. JUSTIFICATION: Cellular and car phones have become inc reasingly mor e popular and affordable t o the g ener al public. In t he interest of protecting all citizens, motorists and pedestria ns alike, those who utilize these portable phones should b e made awa re that the use of such devices while operating a motor vehicle have been knov.'TI to be the cause of traffic accidents and caution is advised in such use. Before an individual can obtain a driver's license he /s he is required to attend a safe t y driving course. The course is designed to educate people concerning the importance of being a responsible and alert driver. Since the use of cellular/car phones white operating a motor vehicl e have (has) the potential of distracting the motorist and caus ing accidents, it seems appropriate that dri vers be r e mi nded of the con ceivable dangers of using such dev i ces. PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY: 1996 a .9768 Ref to Consumer Affairs & Protection FISCAL IMPLICATIONS FOR STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENTS: None. EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect on the one hundred eightieth day after it shall have become a law, provided that necessary rules and regulations may be promu l gated prior to such date. 49


New York State Assemb l y [W elcome Page] [Legislative InfQonationJ [Bill Searches] N ew York State Bill A04587 All available information for bill A04587, except its tex t is supplied in this document. You may jump to a particula r item by selecting from the menu below, or you may simply scroll down through this document To view the bill text select the l ast item fro m the menu below. [Summary] [Acti ons] [Votes) [Memo ] [Text] Summary of Bill A04587 B IL L NO A04587A SPONSOR Ortiz COSPNSR ML TSPNSR Clark, Galef, Harenberg Requires the department of motor v e hicles to include information on accidents involving operato r use of cell ular or car phone in its annual summary of motor v ehicle accidents. Actions on Bill A04587 BILL NO A0 4 587A 02120fl997referred to transportation Ol/07fl998referred to transportation 05/08/1998amend and recommit to transportation 05/08/1998print number 4587a Votes on Bill A04587 Vote record no t foun d for bill A4587 Memo on Bill A04587 Memo record not found for bill A4587 50


New York State Assembly [Welcome Page) [Legislative Infonnation) [Bill Searches) New York State Bill A04444 All available infonnation for bill A04444, except its text, is s u pplied in this document. You may jump to a panicular item by selecting from the menu below, or you may simply scroll down through this document. To view the bill tex t select the last item f rom the menu below. fSumm arv ) (Actions] [Votes) [Memo) [Text] Summary of Bill A04444 BILL NO A04444 SPONSOR Sidikman COSPNSR ML TSPNSR DiNapoli, Hochberg Amd S375, V & TL Prohibits use of a hand held cellular telephone while operating a motor vehicle. Actions on Bill A04444 B ILL NO A04444 02/J 811997refe.rred t o transpona tio n OJ/07/1998referred to transponation 05/05/1998held for consideration in transponation Votes on Bill A04444 Vote record not found for bill A4444 Memo on Bill A04444 BILL NUMBER: A4444 PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF BILL: To proh ibit the use of a hand held cellular phone, while operating a motor vehicle. 51


SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS: Section one amends Section S375 of the Vehicle and Traffic Law by adding a new subdivision (24-b), w h ich defines a hand held cellular phone, and makes it unlawful to operate a motor vehicle while using a hand held cellular phone JUSTIFICATION: For years now, people have been using cellu lar phones in motor vehicles and they have often helped save lives, reduce traffic congestion, and report accidents As such, the re has bee n an explosion in t h e purchase and use of the hand held cellular phone However, along with the increased usage of car phones, there is an increase in accidenls related to the use of the phones. A recent report cited that people who use a cellular phone in the car, run a 34% higher risk of having an accident. A hands free operation kit is available at th is time, but some are prohibitively expensive, leaving the average motorist to use only one hand on t he wheel while using the car pho n e. A 1995 study s ltowed that talking on a cellular phone while driving quadruples the risk of an accident and is about as dangerous as being close to legally drunk behind the wheel. This measure seeks to limit the chances of an accident being caused by the use of such a cell phone PRIOR LEG!SLA T!V HISTORY: None FISCA L IMPLICA TIONS : None to the State EFFECTIVE DATE: January I, 1998 Bill A04444 (Summary] [Ac tio ns ) [Votes) [Memo] (Text)


New York State Assembly [Welcome Page] [Legislative Infonnation) [Bill Searches] New York S tate Bill A 06803 All available infonnation for bill A06803, except its te xt, is supplied in this document. You may jump to a part i cular item by selecting f rom the menu be low, or you may simply scroll down through thi s document. To view the bill text, select the last item from the menu be l ow. [Summary] [Actions] [Votes] [Me mo] [Iext] Summary of Bill A06803 BILL NO A06803B SPONSOR Weisenberg COSPNSR Ortiz, Diaz Galef, DiNa poli ML TSPNSR Colton Davis, Glick Greene, Meeks, Perry, Sidikman, Sweeney Add Art 34-C SSJ2801283 V & T L Requires t he governor's traffic safety comm i ttee to study th e effects of cellular telephone t e chno log y and other driver distra ctions on highway and tr a ffic safety a nd reducing motor vehicle accidents related to the use of cellular tel ephones or similar equipment in conjunction with the operation of such motor vehicles Actions on Bill A06803 BILL NO A06803B 03/25/1997referred to transportation 06/1 0/1997 reporte d ref erred to ways and means 06/ll/1997amend (t) and recommit to ways and means 06/1111 997print number 6803a 06124 11997reported referred to rules 06/30/1997rules report cal. 627 06/30/1997ordered to third reading ntles cal. 627 07/1511997passed assembly 07!15/1997delivered to senate 07/16/l997REFERRED TO RULES 01/0711998DIED IN SENATE OJ/07/J998RETURNED TO ASSEMBLY 53


01107/1998committed to rules Ol/20/l998amend and recommit to rules 6803b 02/03/1998mles committee discharged and conunitted to transpo rtation 03/17/1998reported 03/19/1998advanced to third reading cal. 58 03/23/1998passed assembly 03/23/1998delivered to senate 03/23/1998REFERRED TO TRANSPORTATION Votes on Bill A06803 BILL: A06803B DATE: 03/2311998 MOTION: YEAINA Y: 144/000 Memo on Bill A06803 BILL NUMBER: A6803B PURPOSE OR G ENERAL IDEA OF BILL: To require the Governor's Traffi c Safety Committee to address the use of cellular telephones while operating a motor vehicle JUSTIFICATION: Cell u lar telephones have become a n important communication device for many drivers on the roads of New York State. A study published recently in the New England Journal of Medi cine regarding the use of cell u lar telephones while operating a motor vehic l e has raised serious driver safety concerns. The smdy found that a person using a cellu lar t e lep hone while ope ra ting a motor vehicle is four times as likely t o have an acc iden t than someone who is not o n the phone. It also concluded that the risk of hav ing a collision whi l e d r iving and us ing a cellular te l ephone is equi valen t to the risk of an accident associated with driving while intoxicated This bill provides for a logical and practica l means for the leg islature to address this highway safety concern. It requires t he Governor's Traffic Safety Committee to submit a report providing recommendations for improv ing highway and traffic safety a nd reducing motor vehicle accidents related to the use of cellular telephones or similar equipment in conjunction with the operation of a motor vehicle. PRJ OR LEGIS LA T!VE HISTORY: This is a new bill. F ISCAL IMPLICATIONS: None EFFECTIVE DATE: This act shall take effect immediately. 54


New York State Assembly (Welcome Page] [Leeislative Information] [Bill Searches ] New York State Bill S05795 All avai lable information for bill S05795 excep t its text is supplied in t his document You ma y jump t o a particular item by selecting from the menu below, or yo u may simp l y s croll down through this document. T o view the bill text select the last item from the menu below (Summary ] [Actions ] [Votes] [Memo) Q'ext] Summary of Bill SOS795 BILL NO S05795 SPONSOR STAVISKY COSPNSR MLTSPNSR Amd S603, V & T L Requires police accident reports i ndi cate whether cellular or digital PCS telephones were present in vehic les and whether the use of such telephones is known or suspected as a contributing factor in such accident. Actions on Bill S05795 BILL NO S05795 08f04fi997REFERRED TO RULES Olf07fl998COMMITTEE D ISCHARGED AND COMMITTED TO TRANSPORTATION Votes on Bill S05795 Vote record not found for bill S5795 Memo on Bill S05795 Memo record not found for bill S5795


Download Options

Choose Size
Choose file type
Cite this item close


Cras ut cursus ante, a fringilla nunc. Mauris lorem nunc, cursus sit amet enim ac, vehicula vestibulum mi. Mauris viverra nisl vel enim faucibus porta. Praesent sit amet ornare diam, non finibus nulla.


Cras efficitur magna et sapien varius, luctus ullamcorper dolor convallis. Orci varius natoque penatibus et magnis dis parturient montes, nascetur ridiculus mus. Fusce sit amet justo ut erat laoreet congue sed a ante.


Phasellus ornare in augue eu imperdiet. Donec malesuada sapien ante, at vehicula orci tempor molestie. Proin vitae urna elit. Pellentesque vitae nisi et diam euismod malesuada aliquet non erat.


Nunc fringilla dolor ut dictum placerat. Proin ac neque rutrum, consectetur ligula id, laoreet ligula. Nulla lorem massa, consectetur vitae consequat in, lobortis at dolor. Nunc sed leo odio.