The Joys of Logging

[matcat]

Ok, I have a question/poll for logging.

Now technically the regs say you must flag at the change of EVERY status change, however I know I myself do not do this if for example going from line 1 to 2, or 2 to 1, or 4 to 1, 2, or 3. Example....

Lets say our day starts at 7am, we started in the sleeper, so we go from line 2 to line 4 at 7am, do a 15 min pretrip, now lets say we go to line 3 and drive (no flag here, even though we changed status), drive until 12pm, lets say we drop to line 4 for 15 min and fuel, this would be flagged, now we go to line 1 for 30 min for lunch (not flagged as we already flagged 3 to 4 for this stop, and at 12:45 we drop down to line 3 and start driving again (also not flagged), we drive until 6pm, and change to line 2, flagging only where we are at, and finish the log off on line 3.

Now that is how I would log it, is there anyone else out there that does it differently, and if so how.

Note, I am doing research for the log program I am writing.

[Rev.Vassago]

I know DDL flags every status change.

[matcat]

I know DDL flags every status change.

Yeah it does and it makes one gawd aweful ugly remark section because of it.

[Rev.Vassago]

Yeah it does and it makes one gawd aweful ugly remark section because of it.

Yeah, but it's legal to the letter of the law regarding indicating the city and state of any duty status change. There are ways they could do it that would make it cleaner. When I ran paper logs, I "forked" my line off my remark if the location hadn't changed.

[mike3fan]

Yeah, but it's legal to the letter of the law regarding indicating the city and state of any duty status change. There are ways they could do it that would make it cleaner. When I ran paper logs, I "forked" my line off my remark if the location hadn't changed.

Yep thats how I do it, if location stays the same I only write it once and connect the changes of status.

[matcat]

That is how I will program it then, to draw a fork line.

[golfhobo]

That is how I will program it then, to draw a fork line.

Just a suggestion, Matcat. You might want to hold off until I have weighed in. WTH exactly IS a "fork line?"

Is that anything like a "bracket?"

[matcat]

A Fork Line:


Sorry, I just had too

But now, a real fork line:

[golfhobo]

Sorry, but that makes no sense. You're grid is all messed up. You drove on line 3 for awhile, so your location changed. You can't draw that "bracket" line on the time grid the way you did, and your "fork line" shows only ONE time element and, I guess, more than one comment.

Please delete your line of forks to bring the page back into specs.

[matcat]

Sorry, but that makes no sense. You're grid is all messed up. You drove on line 3 for awhile, so your location changed. You can't draw that "bracket" line on the time grid the way you did, and your "fork line" shows only ONE time element and, I guess, more than one comment.

Please delete your line of forks to bring the page back into specs.

It is a demonstration! Doesn't have to be right. I didn't realize I did a line 3 in there when I quickly put it together

[golfhobo]

Sorry. I thought you were serious about this.

[matcat]

Sorry. I thought you were serious about this.

I am, but you decided to pick on the details instead of getting the idea.

[golfhobo]

The details are what will make it legal and usable. The "idea" of YOUR fork at ONE time point made no sense. I believe the Rev was talking about a BRACKET showing all time at one location. Yours doesn't.

BTW, there is no requirement to 'flag" the location when going from line 1 to line 2 or back.

Gotta go to work. Have fun.

[matcat]

The details are what will make it legal and usable. The "idea" of YOUR fork at ONE time point made no sense. I believe the Rev was talking about a BRACKET showing all time at one location. Yours doesn't.

BTW, there is no requirement to 'flag" the location when going from line 1 to line 2 or back.

Gotta go to work. Have fun.

Yes I do know how and what a legal bracket is, I just drew that line to do it real quick. but unless I am missing something and assuming that line 3 was a different line, that is exactly how it would look, only the bracket would be drawn as an arc below the time line grid.

[Mackman]

One good thing about local no logs were i work. When i get stop by the DOT i just tell them i punch a time clock.

[Rev.Vassago]

BTW, there is no requirement to 'flag" the location when going from line 1 to line 2 or back.

Wrong again, golfhobo.

§395.8 Driver’s record of duty status.

(c) For each change of duty status (e.g., the place of reporting for work, starting to drive, on-duty not driving and where released from work), the name of the city, town or village, with State abbreviation, shall be recorded.

What you are likely mistaking for this regulation is the interpretation:

Question 1: How should a change of duty status for a short period of time be shown on the driver’s record of duty status?

Guidance: Short periods of time (less than 15 minutes) may be identified by drawing a line from the appropriate on-duty (not driving) or driving line to the remarks section and entering the amount of time, such as “6 minutes,” and the geographic location of the duty status change.

Although I'm sure you'll claim that since the "examples" given didn't include any off duty activities, they didn't "intend" for it to include those. But since you're still hung up on the word "fork" as opposed to "bracket", it's understandable that you can make that kind of error.

[DaveP]

That's what I ususally do...just sit back and say "ahh...fork it!"

[Uturn2001]

I always used brackets.

Lets say I was in the sleeper from 12 am to 7am and then off duty from 7am to 10am. In this case I would bracket everything from 12 am to 10 am on the remarks time line and draw another line at the 7 am mark. From the "long" bracket I would then draw one remarks line down to state my location.

Then when I would go on duty to do a VI I would bracket that time and make a new remark line stating location and activity.

It satisfies the requirements and makes the log look a lot nicer. Never had any problems or even negative comments from any DOT type or company safety department.

[golfhobo]

Wrong again, golfhobo.

What you are likely mistaking for this regulation is the interpretation:


Although I'm sure you'll claim that since the "examples" given didn't include any off duty activities, they didn't "intend" for it to include those. But since you're still hung up on the word "fork" as opposed to "bracket", it's understandable that you can make that kind of error.

Why the large type? I'm not blind.

First, it will come as no surprise that I DON'T agree that I am wrong.

Second, I am NOT confused by the only slightly relevant "interpretation" that you mentioned. It doesn't apply to this discussion.

Third, yes... that is EXACTLY what I am claiming as support for my interpretation of the exact reg and para you quoted.

Although they said those were "examples," and I suppose there COULD be others, they clearly didn't mention any change from line one to line 2. And there is a good reason.

It's NOT because no Off Duty activities were mentioned. Some were IMPLIED by such things as "reporting to work" and "being released from work." And the very fact that these two "changes" to or from an OFF DUTY status can occur at different locations is why they must be flagged.

First, one must agree and understand that the purpose of flagging IS to show the location of a duty status change. No explanation of the activity is required...just the location.

Second, one must understand that (unless you are teaming) it is impossible to change from line 1 to line 2 directly (or vice versa) without BEING in the same location one was at the last time one flagged going OFF DUTY (either in the sleeper or on line 1.)

Third, "bracketing" is not a requirement. One can show just a single flag through the time element that the duty status changed (along with the location,) and it is understood that one is still at that location, regardless of duty status, until another flag shows a different location...or you begin line 3 (driving.)

This is consistent with and proved by the instructions for J.J. Keller's scannable logs. Scannable logs interface directly with DOT computers. I'm sure any "failure" to follow the rules would result in a warning if not a company and/or driver violation.

[matcat]

Scannable logs interface directly with DOT computers. I'm sure any "failure" to follow the rules would result in a warning if not a company and/or driver violation.

Please provide a link with evidence of this