Accident during a restart

[allan5oh]

The "letter of the law" the way it is stated means MB is right. I don't think this is logical however. A few minutes attending an accident scene while you were not driving, nor expected to be in a state of readiness, should not disturb your 34 hour reset.

But even then, just having 15 minutes for one day should set you up as far as hours go. I don't think it's that big of a deal. You don't NEED to reset.

[golfhobo]

allan5oh said:

The "letter of the law" the way it is stated means MB is right.

Obviously, I disagree. But, at least I respect your opinon. Tune in this wekend when I hope to have time to make this all a bit more clear.

I don't think this is logical however. A few minutes attending an accident scene while you were not driving, nor expected to be in a state of readiness, should not disturb your 34 hour reset.

I agree, and unless your hood is taken off REPEATEDLY during your 34 hour restart, I don't think it WOULD.

But even then, just having 15 minutes for one day should set you up as far as hours go. I don't think it's that big of a deal.

I'm not sure I follow this. Please explain.

You don't NEED to reset.

Often times, you DO. IF you reset LAST time....and you just burned your 70 in 5 days and sat for nearly TWO, your 8th day back will be 0 hours, so you'll sit another day or two. Consider this:

Let's say you started Tuesday at 12:01 a.m. and ended your 70 hour week (in 5 days) at midnight on Saturday and took Sunday and half of Monday off. You SHOULD be able to start work halfway through Monday, right? (actually... 10 a.m.)

Now, Swifty takes your hood off just before you can go back to work, putting you BACK on the 70 hour rule.

1) At midnight Monday night, you will STILL have worked 70 in the last 7 days. So, you have to gain hours back to move. At midnight Monday, you will STILL have worked 70 hours in 8 days because you were OFF last Monday. So, you have to sit ALL DAY Tuesday! At midnight Tuesday night, you will gain back whatever hours you worked AFTER midnight last Sunday.

2) Assuming best case scenario, and you worked until 2 p.m. last Sunday (instead of taking the whole weekend off,) you will have a full 14 hour clock for Wednesday... but, you may have much LESS.

3) So, you have been off work since midnight Saturday night, and can go back to work at midnight Tuesday night. That is 72 hours OFF DUTY and not making any money! That exceeds even the number of hours you are allowed to WORK in 8 days! (Not meaning to confuse... that just means you sat longer than you WORKED!)

4) Furthermore.... because you were "on duty" for the time M/B says you had to be to answer a few questions for an LEO on Monday, you have exceeded your 70 hours in 8 days, and you can't even start work until you have "erased' those hours from your 70 hour rule. So you can't even start driving at Midnight Tuesday night without being in violation of the 70 hour rule, and NO driving that day should be done UNTIL (or unless) you wait that additional time.

So, now it's about 2 a.m Wednesday before you can go back to work. You've been sitting since Saturday night at midnight!

Now... NONE of that matters! Because, if the accident report was taken 2 hours before your 34 hour restart would have been over at 10 a.m Monday, and you went BACK off duty.... you would have ANOTHER 34 hour restart in by about 6 p.m Tuesday night! So, you got in TWO 34 restarts before you could even gain back any hours under the 70 hour rule!

I don't know about you.... but, this sounds totally ridiculous to ME!

Carriers would REVOLT! Drivers would REVOLT! And it does NOT fit the "spirit" of the regs that clearly state that a MOMENTARY interruption, that doesn't prohibit getting the required rest or "sleep," would NOT bust your reset, retart, a 10 hour break, etc. About the ONLY thing they are adamant about is uninterrupted opportunity to SLEEP! (especially where it concerns the 8 hour sleeper berth requirement.)

Gotta go! See ya'll some more this weekend!

[cdswans]

MB states "No but I have yet to loose (sic) a case once it was submitted."

You wouldn't care to post a few docket #s to back that up, would you?

Regardless, you're missing the point. If I reset at a truck stop and log lines 1 + 2, I need to flag for turds? Yet, if I leave my truck at the same truck stop and reset at the adjacent Shady Rest Motel, I can then drive a demolition derby, drink in the bar until they throw me out, then compete in a triathalon without once hitting the hay or having to log a log and, in the eyes of the law, I'm a rested and ready trucker. In the meantime, your successor minions up in Cortez are using suppository interrogatories trying to flush out scofflaw evacuates.

Do us all a favor . . hop in the company chopper and make your way to the Will Rogers Turnpike. I want to know the status of that Driver's phone for the 30 minutes preceeding today's octofatal.

Stop wasting your employer's (me) money.

[golfhobo]

Don't forget, Swanny..... that if you are an O/O and doing a 34 hour restart at HOME (or anywhere) you can get in your truck and drive it OFF DUTY to the nearest liquor store to stock up. You come out and put all that alcohol in your truck and ... BANG.... a Swifty takes your hood off!

The cops come and take a report and notice the liquor in your truck.

They can't do a DAMN thing about it because you are OFF DUTY. Oh wait.... M/B would say that when they ask you a few questions for THEIR report, which YOU will need for your insurance (because YOU are the carrier) you are now ON DUTY and therefore they can bust you for the alcohol in your truck!

AND you just blew your 34 hour restart!

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that, there is M/B's way of interpreting the regs.... and then there is what the FMCSA intended.... and fairly cleary stated.

When one takes ANY government reg TOO literally.... the combined effect through extrapolation into actual events leads to contradictions that the regs just can't explain.... or accomodate.

Which is the REASON for the "spirit of the law." It permeates our entire society and judicial system. It sets things right in the universe.

The purpose, intention, wording and spirit of the 34 hour restart (which anti-trucking groups have fought) is stated over and over in the final ruling.

Looked at from two different viewpoints, it is like this:

1) It gives you a FULL 24 hour period off duty which they assume is a full nights sleep and a FULL DAY off.... PLUS another full night's sleep (10 hour "break") to put you BACK on your circadian rhythm of working DAYS.... so you don't switch shifts every week, or...

2) It gives you the opportunity to get TWO FULL NIGHT'S sleep and a full day off inbetween, so that you will be fully rested and STILL on your circadian rhythm of working days and sleeping nights.

That is pretty much ALL they care about! And they are fighting those "groups" in court for our RIGHT to take ONLY that much time before going back to work. The groups would prefer a mandatory 48 hours (two full days) off.... but that means your company can dispatch you at midnight for the next week.... interrupting your circadian rhythm!

THEY have clearly stated that they can't regulate your off duty time UNLESS you are logging the 8 hour sleeper berth for the purpose of splitting your break! (and I doubt they intend you to have to take another 2 hours just because you ran to the toilet!)

YOU gave an extreme example which, although WITHIN the regs, COULD come back to hurt you IF you had a fatal accident.... because they GAVE you the "opportunity" to get restorative REST.

AND, they have clearly stated that your EMPLOYER cannot "repeatedly" interrupt your ability to GET that rest with phone calls or qualcomm messages. (they don't have the authority to tell the LEO he can't talk to you!)

But, they have said NOTHING that clearly indicates that a "momentary" interruption EVEN to interact with an LEO, which does NOT inhibit your ability to get those TWO full nights sleep, and basically be "at liberty" for a full day off, would put you ON DUTY and BUST YOUR RESTART.

In fact, they HAVE clearly stated that in ANY such case, the "definition" of doing work for the employer MUST be "modified" as a REPEATED interruption.

Otherwise, you couldn't get and accept a "preplan" until you finish your 34 hour restart! I've never dealt with these "preplans," but.... how many of you finish your 34 hours and THEN sit and wait for a preplan?

[Rev.Vassago]

Show some court cases to back up your "spirit" of the law. It is up to judges to interpret the law, not you. If they haven't done so, then your "spirit" of the law is meaningless drivel.

[Orangetxguy]

Some of the arguments here have exceeded the extreme!!

[Myth_Buster]

allan5oh said:

Obviously, I disagree. But, at least I respect your opinon. Tune in this wekend when I hope to have time to make this all a bit more clear.

GH the interpretations allow a driver responding to satellite communications a reprieve from having their reset interrupted except when a pattern of satellite communications occur. The interpretation clearly states a driver may not perform any work for a carrier.

Interpretations for Part 395.2 states:

Question 11: Must non transportation-related work for a motor carrier be recorded as on-duty time?

Guidance: Yes. All work for a motor carrier, whether compensated or not, must be recorded as on-duty time. The term “work” as used in the definition of “on-duty time” in §395.2 of the FMCSRs is not limited to driving or other non transportation-related employment.

Obtaining an accident report is work as the carrier MUST obtain and retain the accident report:

§390.15 Assistance in investigations and special studies.

(a) A motor carrier must make all records and information pertaining to an accident available to an authorized representative or special agent of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, an authorized State or local enforcement agency representative or authorized third party representative, upon request or as part of any investigation within such time as the request or investigation may specify. A motor carrier shall give an authorized representative all reasonable assistance in the investigation of any accident including providing a full, true and correct response to any question of the inquiry.

3) So, you have been off work since midnight Saturday night, and can go back to work at midnight Tuesday night. That is 72 hours OFF DUTY and not making any money! That exceeds even the number of hours you are allowed to WORK in 8 days! (Not meaning to confuse... that just means you sat longer than you WORKED!)

GH everyone else in America works 40 hours and gets 48 hours off for the weekend. Doesn't drivers deserve the same?

Get a grip your hyperventalating and not focused.

4) Furthermore.... because you were "on duty" for the time M/B says you had to be to answer a few questions for an LEO on Monday, you have exceeded your 70 hours in 8 days, and you can't even start work until you have "erased' those hours from your 70 hour rule. So you can't even start driving at Midnight Tuesday night without being in violation of the 70 hour rule, and NO driving that day should be done UNTIL (or unless) you wait that additional time.

Stay focused GH the post is regarding an accident where the driver was hit, called the police, ran a truck down on foot to a truck stop accross the street, walked back to his truck, waited for the officer, offered his side of the report, probably took photographs, completed his company's accident report, waited for the LEO to interview the other driver, waited for the LEO to complete an accident report, and obtained the report.

Seems obvious to me the accident being discussed involved at least 30 - 45 minutes.

I don't know about you.... but, this sounds totally ridiculous to ME!

It seems ridiculous to me that you are off topic and ranting about something that may or may not be the same to the topic at hand.

Carriers would REVOLT! Drivers would REVOLT! And it does NOT fit the "spirit" of the regs that clearly state that a MOMENTARY interruption, that doesn't prohibit getting the required rest or "sleep," would NOT bust your reset, retart, a 10 hour break, etc. About the ONLY thing they are adamant about is uninterrupted opportunity to SLEEP! (especially where it concerns the 8 hour sleeper berth requirement.)

The 34 hour reset is designed to allow the driver to relax and gain some much needed rest. The only time the sleeper berth is relevant is when the sleeper berth provision is used and the driver must have eight hours of sleeper berth to be combined with two hours off-duty time.

Any time a driver has a time stamped document inside of a 34 or 8 or 2 or 10 hour rest period there is a possibility the reset was not valid; thereby, creating a possible HOS violation.

MB states "No but I have yet to loose (sic) a case once it was submitted."

You wouldn't care to post a few docket #s to back that up, would you?

All of the information has one common thread, I'll let you figure it out. The dockets have to do with cases challenged and the challenge lost. The penalties provided are for closed cases.

Regulations.gov

See docket FMCSA-2001-10078-0001, 0002, and 0003

See docket FMCSA-2004-18026-0001-0001, 0001-0002, 0002, and 0003

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 9/5/2007 IL-2007-371 Compliance Review

392.6 Scheduling a run which would require exceeding speed limits 5 $9,450.00
395.8(e) False reports of records of duty status 7 $5,250.00

1 1/31/2008 IL-2008-35 Compliance Review

172.800(b) Offering or transporting w/o a security plan conforming to Subpart requirements 1 $8,770.00

391.45(b)(1) Using a driver not medically reexamined each 24 months 3 $5,190.00

395.8(a) Failing to require driver to make a record of duty status 18 $18,000.00

395.8(e) False reports of records of duty status 20 $20,000.00

396.21(b) Failing to retain periodic inspection report for 14 months 9 $6,120.00

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 11/21/2008 IL-2009-315 Compliance Review

172.200(a) Offering a HM without preparing a shipping paper. (None at all) 1 $4,650.00

173.33(a)(3) Specification cargo tank filled and offered w/past due retest/reinspection dates 1 $6,060.00

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 5/8/2008 IL-2008-108 Compliance Review

382.305(b)(2) Failing to do random drug tests at applicable annual rate 6 $28,320.00

390.35 Requiring, permitting or making false statements or records. 1 $5,730.00

395.8(a) Failing to require driver to make a record of duty status 19 $15,770.00

396.11(c) Failing to correct Out-of-Service defects reported on DVIR. 3 $27,720.00

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 2/22/2009 IL-2009-10 Compliance Review

390.35 Requiring, permitting or making false statements or records. 3 $2,340.00

396.17(g) Failing to repair parts not meeting inspection standards 1 $4,560.00

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 9/3/2008 IL-2008-393 Compliance Review 387.7(a) Inadequate or no financial responsibility 3 $8,550.00

2 4/27/2007 IL-2007-333 Compliance Review 385.403 Transporting hazardous materials requiring a hazardous materials safety permit. 1 $2,340.00

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 5/9/2008 IL-2008-357 Compliance Review 392.9a(a) Operating w/out registration (49 USC 13902) 1 $25,000.00

Regardless, you're missing the point. If I reset at a truck stop and log lines 1 + 2, I need to flag for turds? Yet, if I leave my truck at the same truck stop and reset at the adjacent Shady Rest Motel, I can then drive a demolition derby, drink in the bar until they throw me out, then compete in a triathalon without once hitting the hay or having to log a log and, in the eyes of the law, I'm a rested and ready trucker. In the meantime, your successor minions up in Cortez are using suppository interrogatories trying to flush out scofflaw evacuates.

People tend to take things to the extreme, the topic of the original post had to do with a driver that spent a considerable amount of time to deal with an accident.

Drivers tend to forget there are video surveillance tapes at truck stops and loading docks. If there is a fatal accident and the video tapes are acquired with the driver being some place else other than the sleeper berth the driver has increased their culpability; whereas, if the driver was supposedly in the sleeper berth for eight hours and a video surveillance has the driver on the dock or inside the terminal the driver is going to have a difficult time proving the required rest was acquired.

Likewise if a driver has a time stamped document in when they are supposedly in the sleeper berth the carrier/driver will be cited for a nominal false log as the log indicated the driver was in the sleeper berth.

Do us all a favor . . hop in the company chopper and make your way to the Will Rogers Turnpike. I want to know the status of that Driver's phone for the 30 minutes preceeding today's octofatal.

Cell phones can be tracked by cell phone towers with a road map of the locations a driver was each time they made or received a call. Cell phones run off mocrowave technology requiring the cell phone to hae line of sight with the tower it is using. No tower, no signal, no service.

As mentioned cases are built on electronic records every day. A & R Transport learned the lesson the hard way when GPS records were used to prove false logs.

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 10/19/2006 IL-2006-64 Compliance Review 395.8(e) False reports of records of duty status 160 $124,800.00

Not my case, but I know the details.

Stop wasting your employer's (me) money.

I have prepared a sufficent number of cases over the years where I am self supporting. If I did not prepare another case for five years my annual salary plus expenses have been paid by carriers discovered to be in non compliance with the FMCSR and HMR.

If that isn't enough there is the other thing:

TruckNet® Drivers RoundTable • View topic - I'm Back... Here's some picts...

Drivers have no idea of the amount of documentation available at the their employer's place of business that maybe used to disprove their log books. Carriers have paid thousands of dollars in penalties for mistakes by their drivers and failure to manage the HOS. Carriers that fail to follow the HOS pay for their mistakes.

Don't forget, Swanny..... that if you are an O/O and doing a 34 hour restart at HOME (or anywhere) you can get in your truck and drive it OFF DUTY to the nearest liquor store to stock up. You come out and put all that alcohol in your truck and ... BANG.... a Swifty takes your hood off!

The cops come and take a report and notice the liquor in your truck.

They can't do a DAMN thing about it because you are OFF DUTY. Oh wait.... M/B would say that when they ask you a few questions for THEIR report, which YOU will need for your insurance (because YOU are the carrier) you are now ON DUTY and therefore they can bust you for the alcohol in your truck!

An O/O without a fore hire DOT and MC number is never the carrier.

It also depends on the circumstances surrounding the run. Did the O/O fuel at any time while on the liquor run? Did the O/O purchase parts for the truck while on the liquor run? Was the O/O making a road check of repairs while on the liquor run? Was the O/O returning from having the vehicle serviced while on the liquor run? Did the O/O just come back from a local wash cleaning the truck? If ANY of the conditions are true the O/O was on-duty driving.

With the cost of repairs, fuel, and the increased possibility of damaging a truck I don't see many O/Os taking their truck for a drive that doesn't something to do with keeping the truck road worthy.

Now if the O/O just dropped a trailer and was bobtailing from the local yard to their home for off-duty time. Then the O/O may transport alcohol in the vehicle used a personal conveyance.

It is becoming increasingly clear to me that, there is M/B's way of interpreting the regs.... and then there is what the FMCSA intended.... and fairly cleary stated.

When one takes ANY government reg TOO literally.... the combined effect through extrapolation into actual events leads to contradictions that the regs just can't explain.... or accomodate.

Then I guess the cases prepared against the carriers would be dropped when the counts are challenged.

I offer insight to extreme conditions when the rules may work against a driver affecting their ability to avoid jail time following a fatal accident or other conditions when a driver's actions could affect their employer. If drivers want to ignore the regulations and interpretations to operate longer that's their choice. However, drivrs that heed the advice and modify their logging habits to be more realistic may avoid severe repurcussions when things go south.

Which is the REASON for the "spirit of the law." It permeates our entire society and judicial system. It sets things right in the universe.

The purpose, intention, wording and spirit of the 34 hour restart (which anti-trucking groups have fought) is stated over and over in the final ruling.

The Constitution guarantees each citizen to pursue life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. That guarantee is valid provided one citizen has not acted irresponsibly and caused another citizen’s right to pursue their inalienable rights. This is backed up by the Supreme Court that ruled a person’s freedom of speech does not allow them to yell “FIRE” in a crowed theater. The point is further driven home by the fact that people cannot joke about hijacking planes at the airport.

Each person has the responsibility of acting responsibly and ensuring their actions do not potentially cause harm to the public. The laws allow regulatory agencies to arrest, convict, or penalize citizens that act irresponsibly. Such is the rules that govern the HOS. When drivers fail to log known activities they set up their employer and themselves for potential penalties pertaining to false logs or HOS violations. If the HOS violation resulted in death or property damage the carrier’s penalty has increased significantly and the driver may loose their job and/or freedom.

Looked at from two different viewpoints, it is like this:

1) It gives you a FULL 24 hour period off duty which they assume is a full nights sleep and a FULL DAY off.... PLUS another full night's sleep (10 hour "break") to put you BACK on your circadian rhythm of working DAYS.... so you don't switch shifts every week, or...

2) It gives you the opportunity to get TWO FULL NIGHT'S sleep and a full day off inbetween, so that you will be fully rested and STILL on your circadian rhythm of working days and sleeping nights.

That is pretty much ALL they care about! And they are fighting those "groups" in court for our RIGHT to take ONLY that much time before going back to work. The groups would prefer a mandatory 48 hours (two full days) off.... but that means your company can dispatch you at midnight for the next week.... interrupting your circadian rhythm!

Nice try GH; however, too many carriers have paid siginificant penalties for false logs. The rules are clear:

§395.8 Driver’s record of duty status.

(f)(7) Signature/certification. The driver shall certify to the correctness of all entries by signing the form containing the driver’s duty status record with his/her legal name or name of record. The driver’s signature certifies that all entries required by this section made by the driver are true and correct.

When a supporting document is discovered that contridicts the drivers' log book the carrier and/or driver is subject to a citation for a false log.

False logs come in three varieties:

1. Nominal false log = Less than 50 miles or less than one hour

2. Critical false log = 50 miles or more or one hour or more off

3. Deliberate false log = It can be proven the falsification caused an HOS violation

An example of the critical and nonminal falsification is listed below, The 61 counts for $25,620 = $420 a count. The two counts of false logs non-critical are for deliberate false logs 2 counts for $1,900 = $950 per count. This was the carrier's first case knocking per count penalties down significantly.

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

1 5/2/2006 IL-2006-314 Compliance Review

395.8(e) False reports of records of duty status 61 $25,620.00

395.8(e) False reports of logs, inaccurate log (not critical) 2 $1,900.00

Not my case, but I knew of the details.

Swift was basically cited for nominal false logs:

http://ai.volpe.dot.gov/SafeStat/Saf...m=&PageN=EH#EH

2 1/8/2004 AZ-2004-41 Compliance Review

395.8(e) Failing to properly enter duty status during meal stops 78 $37,440.00

Because so many drivers fudging and falsifying their logs cases are prepared against carriers for false logs on a REGULAR basis. It is no longer relevant what the spirt of the rules meant. The driver falsified their log end of story.

Not many carriers are prosecuted for HOS as drivers falsify their logs to hide the HOS violations. Any defense a driver may have as what they believe was right or wrong regarding their duty status will have to have an allowed exception from the HOS. I challenge any driver to provide a clear cut exception indicating they are not required to flag each change of duty status. Not flagging a chage in duty status is at least a nominal falsification.

THEY have clearly stated that they can't regulate your off duty time UNLESS you are logging the 8 hour sleeper berth for the purpose of splitting your break! (and I doubt they intend you to have to take another 2 hours just because you ran to the toilet!)

Moot point, if an activity changes the off-duty time to on-duty time the event must be flagged. Failing to flag the activity = false log. If there is a document to indicate the event occurred the driver must log the event or face a false log.

YOU gave an extreme example which, although WITHIN the regs, COULD come back to hurt you IF you had a fatal accident.... because they GAVE you the "opportunity" to get restorative REST.

I have dealt with the the extreme on three occassions.

1. Driver from Chicago rearended stopped cars on I-80 in Wyoming - Driver was jailed

2. Fatal accident 10/01/2003 on I-90 at the Hampshire Tollbooth - Driver was charged with manslaghter

NTSB - Publications

3. Fatal accident involoving a Chciago based motor coach 10/04/2004 in Arkansas.

All an attorney has to do is demonstrate a driver or company had safety violations discovered, once the violations are documented by the FMCSA or a state the public may request the reports through the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA.) If a driver is cited for false logs because a documents examined demonstrated the driver was not in the sleeper berth as indicated it will be next to impossible for the driver or carrier to prove in a civil or criminal court the driver had the needed rest.

Drivers have to understand, it doesn't matter whether you had the rest or not if the driver doesn't log the activity associated with a time stamped document the log is false. The time stamp is proof the driver was performing a fuction that was on-duty not driving or driving. I cannot tell you how many drivers have had toll receipts while in the sleeper berth. It did not matter the driver was off-duty and could have used the vehicle as a personal conveyance. The fact is you cannot drive from the sleeper berth!

AND, they have clearly stated that your EMPLOYER cannot "repeatedly" interrupt your ability to GET that rest with phone calls or qualcomm messages. (they don't have the authority to tell the LEO he can't talk to you!)

GH if you're talking with a LEO in performance of functions associated with reports the carrier must have it's ON-DUTY NOT DRIVING. If there is an accident report generated at 10:31 AM and you logged SB from 9:00 AM - 7:00 PM without flagging 10:31 AM with a city and state it is a false log. The FMCSA does not have to prove or charge you with an HOS violation. You will be cited for a false log as there was a documented activity with no indication the event occured.

In fact, they HAVE clearly stated that in ANY such case, the "definition" of doing work for the employer MUST be "modified" as a REPEATED interruption.

The rules state that momentary interuptions of the sleepr berth or off-duty time will not interupt a rest period. No where in the regulations does it state the driver is not required to record the activity in-accordance-with Part 395.8. If there is evidence of satellite communications and the driver responded without flagging the activity it is a false log.

Otherwise, you couldn't get and accept a "preplan" until you finish your 34 hour restart! I've never dealt with these "preplans," but.... how many of you finish your 34 hours and THEN sit and wait for a preplan?

If the driver responded the activity would have to be flagged with a city and state.

Some of the arguments here have exceeded the extreme!!

IMHO it is a case of some drivers trying to justify their actions as they currently perform them. I hope it is clear that any time there is a time stamped document the driver must flag the activity to indicate the event occurred. Failing to flag an activity associated with a time stamped document is flirting with disaster.

It's amazing how many drivers are cited for a false log and speeding because they neglected to log a fuel stop associated with a daily fuelo summary on-file at the carrier. The time from point "A" to "B" was sufficent; however, the fuel stop at point "C" was too far from point "A" or "B" and the time logged from point "C" to point "A" or "B" indicated the driver was doing 80 mph. Carrier cited for nomianl false log as the driver did not log the fuel stop and for speeding as the driver's log indicated they were driving at 80 mph.

GH can argue the spirit of the regulation all he wants to as chances are if drivers fail to record an event with a time stamped document they will be cited for a false log. The only exception I can think of is toll receipts. Then it is imperative the driver's log can sustain the driver was in the vacinity when the toll receipt was issued.

I want to emphasize the original post indicated the driver's truck was hit, the drivr called the police, the driver chased the offending truck down on foot to a truck stop accross the street, the driver whose truck was hit had to walk back to his truck, wait for the officer to arrive, provide information, wait for the other driver to provide information and for the LEO to complete the report. If there is one driver that feels the activity could be flagged opposed to logged is clueless. Do not expect the DOT ti be as gulible as you are.

IMHO it is a case of some drivers trying to justify their actions as they currently perform them. I hope it is clear that any time there is a time stamped document the driver must flag the activity to indicate the event occurred. Failing to flag an activity associated with a time stamped document is flirting with disaster.

It's amazing how many drivers are cited for a false log and speeding because they neglected to log a fuel stop associated with a daily fuel summary on-file at the carrier. The time from point "A" to "B" was sufficient; however, the fuel stop at point "C" was too far from point "A" or "B" and the time logged from point "C" to point "A" or "B" indicated the driver was doing 80 mph. Carrier cited for nominal false log as the driver did not log the fuel stop and for speeding as the driver's log indicated they were driving at 80 mph.

GH can argue the spirit of the regulation all he wants to as chances are if drivers fail to record an event with a time stamped document they will be cited for a false log. The only exception I can think of is toll receipts. Then it is imperative the driver's log can sustain the driver was in the vicinity when the toll receipt was issued.

I want to emphasize the original post indicated the driver's truck was hit, the driver called the police, the driver chased the offending truck down on foot to a truck stop across the street, the driver whose truck was hit had to walk back to his truck, wait for the officer to arrive, provide information, wait for the other driver to provide information and for the LEO to complete the report. If there is one driver that feels the activity could be flagged opposed to logged is clueless. Do not expect the DOT to be as gullible as you are.

Be safe.

[Orangetxguy]

MB (Mike)? Are you suggesting that an "off duty driver", whom is using a "Bobtail" tractor as "Personal Conveyance", must flag a Toll booth or Pre-Pass of a weigh station, even though the driver is off duty during the event?

[Myth_Buster]

MB (Mike)? Are you suggesting that an "off duty driver", whom is using a "Bobtail" tractor as "Personal Conveyance", must flag a Toll booth or Pre-Pass of a weigh station, even though the driver is off duty during the event?

I'm saying that if a vehicle was being road tested, used to obtain parts, being returned after repairs were made, or fueled then the driver is on-duty driving or on-duty not driving.

If there are toll receipts associated with the activity/activities listed above then the driver's log would have to be in the vacinity where the toll receipt was issued at the time it was issued.

I also mentioned that drivers cannot have toll receipts when they log sleeper berth time. While a driver may have received toll receipts while off-duty and not logged the driving time, a driver cannot drive the truck from the sleeper berth; therefore, if a driver is logging sleeper berth and a toll receipt is presented it would be a false log.

The driver cannot drive from the sleeper berth regardless of their status.

Be safe.

[Rev.Vassago]

What if I put a steering wheel in my sleeper berth?

[chris1]

What if I put a steering wheel in my sleeper berth?

It's a pete,put the seat in the back holes,slide it all the way back,lay the column down and your in the sleeper.

[golfhobo]

What if I put a steering wheel in my sleeper berth?

Well, if it's connected to the internet through your laptop, and you are "training" in how to drive a big rig, then you would be performing WORK for you employer, and you would have to log it on line 3.... or 4..... or something, and it would BUST your restart!

And, don't even THINK about taking a dump while you're in that sleeper berth, cuz that will automatically change your 8 hour S/B into a 10 hour Off Duty time! And you'll be LATE for your delivery!

[golfhobo]

It's a pete,put the seat in the back holes,slide it all the way back,lay the column down and your in the sleeper.

But, you can't LOG it as sleeper, cuz you're "at the controls" of a CMV.... with NO REGARD to whether or not it is IN OPERATION!

[golfhobo]

Interpretation of rule 392

Question 3: Does the prohibition against carrying alcoholic beverages in §392.5 apply to a driver who uses a company vehicle, for personal reasons, while off-duty?

Guidance: No. For example, an owner-operator using his/her own vehicle in an off-duty status, or a driver using a company truck or tractor for transportation to a motel, restaurant, or home, would normally be outside the scope of this section.

If you are OUTSIDE the scope of the alchohol prohibition section while OFF DUTY... I submit you are OUTSIDE the scope of the so-called "on duty" reg!

Why? Because, per the topic sentence of that reg, you have been RELIEVED of duty and have not yet gone back ON DUTY.

You don't have to log turd breaks! You don't have to log NON-REPEATING interruptions of that break for qualcomm or phone calls. There is JUST AS MUCH "paper trail" for qualcomm and phone call messages as there is for an accident report. But, THEY have been excluded if they are not "repetitive" and don't inhibit your ability to get REST!

If you can show AT LEAST 8 uninterrupted hours in the sleeper berth TWICE during a 34 hour restart, 30-45 minutes during the other 18 hours OFF DUTY (which they don't regulate) .... if not REPEATEDLY... does NOT inhibit your ability to get rest! It sucks, it happened. You have to "take" a report from the LEO. But, it doesn't rise to the level of performing REPEATED work for the employer that inhibits your ability to get restorative rest!

For the record... and for M/B who THINKS I am trying to cheat the system.... I would NOTE the time of the report in my remarks section. That section is not scanned in on scannable logs. I would not "FLAG" it as a change of duty status.... anymore than I would FLAG a qualcom message that didn't become a "repeated" interruption!

IF, under the worst case scenario, a fatal accident occured after I went BACK on duty.... I will have covered my azz by "reporting" on my log that the parking lot incident happened. I won't be 100 miles away as he likes to use as a basis for his NOC's!

And, given the "exceptions" in the regs for MOMENTARY interruptions of a break (of any length,) I doubt there is a court in the land that will convict me of falsifying a log, driving when I'm not supposed to, or driving sleepy!

There is NOTHING in the regs, or the interpretations, concerning "momentary" interruptions of a break that says you are REQUIRED to flag it as a change of duty status. M/B is making that chit up!

Even a "flag" of a momentary interruption in an 8 hour sleeper berth break, means you have to start all over or count it as an "off duty" 2 hour break at the most.... or change it into a 10 hour break!

A "momentary" flag of change of duty to ON DUTY NOT DRIVING, during a 34 hour restart would require that you start all over, or revert to the 70 hour rule... at BEST!

I dont think this fits into the "spirit of the regs," and I have heard NOTHING from M/B to change my mind. He quotes cases where SOME companies or drivers (mostly Mexican) have cleary violated the regs. I'm GLAD he in "on duty" to stop that!

But, he has given NO examples of a ticketed or fined violation for the "topic of this thread" that he claimed to adhere to!

I'm quite CLEAR on what the O.P. was discussing. I gave MY opinion, based on MY understanding of the regs. I stand BY that opinon! I am STILL not impressed by MythBuster's responses that include cases and situations that are IRRELEVANT. He has a REAL problem with being "relevant."

If I'm on a 34 hour restart, and someone hits my truck, I'm going to call the police and file a report. I'm going to put that report number, and the responding agency in my remarks section. I'm also going to consider it a "momentary" interruption of my break as concerns "doing work" for my emplioyer. I'm NOT going to FLAG it to an "on duty" line and BUST my restart! (anymore than I'll FLAG a turd from the sleeper!)

The O.P, and the REST of you can do what YOU believe is right. I submit that you should call your SAFETY Dept with this question, instead of asking US!

Buit, I SURE wouldn't rely on the irrelevant case histories that M/B provides to make your decision. EVERY one of them relates to a driver who intentionally falsified his logs and wasn't WHERE he said he was at a certain time! THAT is not in question here!

The closest M/B got to the original question is to state that if you're on an 8 hour S/B break, and you need to run inside to take a dump, you HAVE to "flag" it as a change of duty status.... that will change your break to a 10 hour "off duty" break!"

I believe he ACTUALLY said that, (as the REV claims,) "passing" thru the cab of your truck requires a duty status change (flagged) regardless of whether or not it is less than the "magical number" of 15 minutes that the REV somehow has come up with!

But, the REGS actually state that any such "flag" is a change of duty status, and could ALTER your break time.

So.... I'm not "flagging" the time I get out of the sleeper to take a dump, anymore than I'm "flagging" the time while on a 10 hour break that I enter my sleeper to get a change of clothes!

And if I'm on a 34 hour restart, I'm not "FLAGGING" anything that is not consiered REPEATED work for my employer! And if I EVER should end up in court, I believe the regs will back me up!

Y'all can do what you WANT!

[Orangetxguy]

I'm saying that if a vehicle was being road tested, used to obtain parts, being returned after repairs were made, or fueled then the driver is on-duty driving or on-duty not driving.

If there are toll receipts associated with the activity/activities listed above then the driver's log would have to be in the vacinity where the toll receipt was issued at the time it was issued.

I also mentioned that drivers cannot have toll receipts when they log sleeper berth time. While a driver may have received toll receipts while off-duty and not logged the driving time, a driver cannot drive the truck from the sleeper berth; therefore, if a driver is logging sleeper berth and a toll receipt is presented it would be a false log.

The driver cannot drive from the sleeper berth regardless of their status.

Be safe.

Thanks for the clarification!


Now...back to

[ssoutlaw]

Boy we got a bunch of road cop judges.....lol Im with you GH, I will not log a famous turd break either. I cant believe they allow this crap to waste their space on this site!!!! or for that matter REV would even get involved!!!!! To many armchair quarterbacks trying to be judge and jury!!! this place has not changed. So whats up GH, still love to read your posts....lol Well gotta go smuggle some more drugs for work...lol
Now the law says you can not have drugs on your person with out a perscription, but I have lots of hard narcotics with me all day long while I am working. I know I do this for a living, but sounds as dumb as the rest of the comments people are making saying you need to do this or that....lol Remember this is my personal opinion!!!! and I have a right to express it in this forum!!!! Peace out......lol!!!!!

[Rev.Vassago]

or for that matter REV would even get involved!!!!!

What the hell did I do?

[Cueball]

I had a friend of mine called a radio show and asked a TX DOT officer this question and was told unfortunately under this circumstance your restart is blown. And you would have to start your 34 over.

[VitoCorleone99]

I knew that before I posted the question. I was just curious to see what kind of angles people would take. It is a pretty asinine result though.

[golfhobo]

I had a friend of mine called a radio show and asked a TX DOT officer this question and was told unfortunately under this circumstance your restart is blown. And you would have to start your 34 over.

I wonder if that TX DOT officer was Monty Dial.... cuz he's been proven to be wrong. Not only that, but.... he's admitted that he's not SURE about many things in the regs.

I got a roadside inspection once from a TX DOT officer. We talked a bit about regs. I mentioned something about him being the "expert" on the subject and he laughed and said.... "Not really. YOU guys probably know more about this stuff than we do."

In 2005, when I started driving, I met a couple of NC DOT officers at a truckstop. I asked one of them about the new provisions for HOS in the new ruling. He said: "We don't know yet. It's all very confusing right now. It will take us a long time to figure it all out."

Referencing your post.... I wonder why the officer didn't say that the driver COULD revert to the 70 hour rule?

Perhaps because, once you get SOME people thinking in ONE LINE of thought, they can't consider all the options.

As I stated earlier. I wouldn't falsify my log in this case. I would make an entry in the remarks section to CMA and mention that it was NOT a "repeated" interruption of my break. The chances of it coming to light in an audit are infinitesimal. And if it did.... I would be charged ONLY with a minor violation of the 70 hour rule. Wouldn't even include a violation of either the 11 or 14 hour rules. [and I would appeal!]

IF by some GOD AWFUL chance I had, or was involved in, an accident that resulted in a death once I started driving again, there is not a court in the land (IMHO) that could prove or reason that I had not had adequate REST before driving that next day.... NOR that I intentionally falsified my log to be drving without rest.

If the guy who turned his truck over on the interstate, and was hit by a sleepy bus driver, wasn't charged..... I don't think "I" would be. And, unlike him, I doubt I would lose any CIVIL lawsuit either. (if I had been operating/resting legally.)

When put before a judge and/or a jury.... there is NO WAY that a 45 minute interruption in a 34 hour restart can be construed to imply that I was not fully rested before going back ON DUTY.

The guidance CLEARLY states that "NON-repeated" interruptions are expected if not excused. The "spirit" of the reg is to disallow the COMPANY from waking you up every hour (when you're trying to SLEEP) to answer a call or message!

If you get TWO full 8 hour sleep periods during a 34 hour restart you have met the intended requirements of the provision. What you do with the other 18 hours, (other than working on your truck or in another "DIRECTED" capacity for your employer) is your own business.... and is NOT regulated (according to the Rev.) .... oops.... I mean the REGS!

If someone takes your hood off during a restart, you are NOT required to inform your company. You have been relieved of all responsibility for the equipment and the load. If you make a phone call to tell them about it, it is NO DIFFERENT than a "non repeated" message from them to you. From there.... THEY can communicate with the LEO or responding agency.

What about the guy in the truck NEXT to you? When the cop knocks on HIS door and asks him if he saw what happened, does it bust HIS restart TOO??

Show me ONE SINGLE REG that specifically (not the generic "doing work for") addresses the interaction between a driver OFF DUTY and an LEO!

Can't FIND one, can you? I wonder why? Perhaps, because it is "outside the scope" of the regulations. In keeping with the regs concerning interactions of a driver ON DUTY with an LEO.... I wonder why he doesn't give you an OOS order to MANDATE when you can drive again? Perhaps, because (if you've met the required times,) he doesn't CARE!

I've never HAD my hood taken off while off duty. Probably because I stay out of Pilots and away from Swifties! Let's hear from someone who HAS!

Did the cop check your logs? Did he TELL you that your break was "busted?" Did he give you an OOS order? NO??? Then was he doing his JOB to protect the motoring public from a tired driver? If NOT.... and you had a fatal accident.... HE would be likewise "culpable" in any lawsuit that followed!

Let's go one more. Has anyone here ever had his hood taken off during a restart and had his COMPANY tell him that he had to restart his "restart?"

Not that I haven't argued (and won) with my Safety Director more than once, but.... that would go along ways towards settling this discussion!

Has ANYONE here ever had this very possible eventuality even DISCUSSED during a company orientation, or any other discussion with their Safety Director?