Traffic stoppage and logbooks
 

The other night, I had the pleasure of sitting for about an hour and a quarter on U.S. 41 within sight of the Ohio River bridge into Evansville IN, while construction crews did their thing on the bridge and shut down the road. I am not a truck driver, so it was no more than an aggravation to me, but I was thinking about the truckers all around me. Many drivers had shut down their engines as it was obvious it was going to be a long wait.

How does such a delay for an accident or construction, when it is sufficient to shut down, maybe get out of the truck and stretch, etc., go into your logbook? If you were running close on your 11 hours of driving, losing an hour like this could be a big problem. Could you log it as line 4, on-duty not driving?

That wouldn't help with the 14-hour clock if that was the problem instead of the 11 hours of driving. What if your 14 hours expired while you were in a tie-up and when the traffic rolled again, you drove on to the first place where you could stop for the night? Somehow, I doubt that Officialdom would cut you much slack, especially if it is the lawyers looking at your logbook in a court case down the road.

What would be the Right Thing to Do?

If the road is "shut down," you may drive UP TO an additional 2 hours (over your 11) to get to your destination or a safe place to shut down AS LONG AS it does not violate your 14 hour clock.

I'm sure someone will come along and quote the reg. And then there will be the expected arguments! :lol:

Thank you (as a 4wheeler) for even CONSIDERING us truckers! Now.... quit cutting us off, riding off our tandems, and parking in DOCK areas.... and we'll be good friends! :lol:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Thats a fact Jack !!

Re: Traffic stoppage and logbooks
 

if you look at a lot of log books there is no such thing as traffic and it always takes 2 hours to drive 120 miles in a 65 mph zone. :lol:

Average speed of 60 mph which is what most companies allow a driver to log with out flagging a logging violation. Traffic? What traffic, never seen any.

all depends on what part of the country you're in

True. In the NE it is very hard to keep an average of 60mph.

This exemption can only be used for unforseen delays. Road construction is not considered an unforseen delay, as it is possible to know about it before being dispatched. So no, a shut down for road construction would not apply, and you cannot drive an additional 2 hours.

I didn't read anything in the original post saying that the construction "shutdown" was advertised in advance. IF and ONLY IF the dispatcher and/or the driver is aware of the planned shutdown would it NOT be allowed.

I don't know what world you live or drive in, Rev. But I drive east coast to west coast. There is little chance that my dispatcher CAN know about every construction "shutdown" over a 3500 mile stretch of interstate.

The FACT is, that if I come across a "shutdown" road.... for ANY reason.... and I was not aware of it when I planned my trip, the FMCSA will allow me the exemption.

Using the adverse conditons provision is a crap shoot in this day and age. With all the different forms of mass media, from radio to the internet, it really is difficult to run into conditons that there was no way of knowing about in advance if one simply takes the time to look.

If a driver feels they have a legit reason to use it, then go for it, myself I never used it, nor would I if I was still on the road for anything other than a road shut down due a traffic accident.

Every state in the union has a number that you can call to get information on road construction. Every state in the union has a website that you can get information on road construction. Every dispatcher has a phone, and I'm willing to bet 99% of them have a computer with internet access.

Just because they fail to get the information, doesn't mean the information was not available to them. If they have a phone, then they COULD have gotten the information.

Good luck with that. I'm sure that DOT is gonna love that "ignorance" excuse. :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

3500 miles coast to coast? Call me, I know a shortcut through the forest. :wink:

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

He takes the scenic route.

Seattle to Key West is about 3500 miles.

But it isn't 3500.

Well.... THAT I do, when I can.....

But, they're called "stop offs" usually slightly out of direct route. You DO know what they are, don't you? :roll: :lol:

Nope. No idea at all. I don't get paid to "stop off".

This says absolutely NOTHING about a requirement for a dispatcher to check every weather forecast or state construction report (using phones, computers or anything else,) before dispatching a run, and certainly wouldn't apply to a temporary shutdown in a construction zone that could not POSSIBLY have been known about hours if not DAYS before I even got there.

The fact that there were 4wheelers caught in this shutdown, indicates it was not advertised even locally before it happened. Regardless, as long as my dispatcher didn't KNOW about it BEFORE he dispatched me, it DOES IN FACT qualify for the exemption, and I WILL be allowed to use said exemption.

Sorry, Rev. But once again, your desire to correct everyone on everything has led you into an indefensible position. Sometimes, it is best just to agree with people who are giving accurate and useful information, or say nothing at all.

Once again, let me know how this "ignorance" defense works for you.

Officer: "Mr. Golfhobo, why did you drive 2 hours beyond your 11 hour driving time?"

Golfhobo: "Well, Mr. Officer, I didn't know that there was road construction, and it slowed me down, so I was making up the lost time."

Officer: "How in the hell do you think you have the right to do that?"

Golfhobo: "Well, my dispatch didn't bother looking up the road construction information for the trip that they planned on me. I didn't bother doing it either. We could have looked it up, but we chose not to. So, as you can see, since we didn't know about it, we can drive beyond the 11 hours."

Officer: "I see what you mean now. Here's your citation. Shut the rig down in the back lot."

Actually, I have never used, and don't see the need to use, it. I would simply say that I pulled over for 2 hours and got in the sleeper. The 14 hour clock remains unchanged, so I saved myself the additional 2 hours needed for driving. But, if I DID.....

Me: "Well officer, as you can easily confirm, there was a road shutdown here which qualifies under the Adverse Conditions Exemption."

Me: "Well sir, it is clearly defined in the fmcsr's, as I'm sure you know. As you can see, I logged it properly, and didn't violate my 14 hour clock."

Me: Yes sir, I WILL! Thank you. And now that I KNOW about the possible shutdowns here, I will allow more time for it on the way back.


:wink:

So, you'd falsify your logbook. Interesting.......

Officer: "Nope, Mr. Golfhobo - the Adverse Conditions Exemption says NOTHING about road construction."

Officer: "Nope, there's nothing in the FMCSR's about road construction. Here - I'll show you."

The officer pulls out the big green FMCSR book, and turns to good ol section 395.2

Officer: "Here's what the Adverse conditions cover, Mr. Lawbreaker Hobo."

Officer: "There's nothing in here that says anything about road construction delays. And there's more."

Officer then turns to the interpretation of section 395.1

Officer: "Read this section, and then get the hell out of my scale house and into your truck for the OOS order I've given you."

Officer: "Now, if you can prove that you were dispatched AFTER the road construction began (or was planned and announced, for that matter), then I'll let you out of the OOS order. But, since this road construction began several months ago, it was reasonable to assume that there could have been a shutdown of the highway, as all of the road construction is listed on the state's website. Here's your ticket."

Make sure you look behind you while backpeddling.

Even if you didn't. Interesting......

Nope. It's pretty clear that they are referring to accidents. A highway being shut down in a construction zone is hardly unusual. The fact that it has been brought up in a hypothetical scenario proves this.

Your point?

If the road construction existed before you began the trip, then you had the obligation to find out if the road would be shut down. If you fail to do what is obligated of you in 395.1, then you are not eligible for the adverse driving condition clause.

No. The regulation is very clear that if they were notified, or if they SHOULD HAVE KNOWN (because the information was available to them), then they cannot use the adverse clause.

Yup. Because it isn't considered an Adverse condition, or an Emergency condition.

Supervisor: "Read this now, and take the citation before I have you arrested."

The regulation SPECIFICALLY SAYS "SHOULD HAVE KNOWN". THEIR WORDS - NOT MINE.

An exact quote taken from Here

Adverse driving conditions never have, nor should they ever, apply to road construction. Ask any DOT officer. :roll:

It's called "reversing" in England and Kazakhstan! And I use my mirrors! :lol:

And, even if I DID! I couldn't say I didn't, if I DID! You can't prove nuttin! :lol:

Funny that they didn't USE the word "accidents." Maybe because there are OTHER conditions that qualify as "adverse?" Most construction zones are SPECIFICALLY designed to allow at least one lane to flow through. Any zone that DOESN'T would certainly be considered UNUSUAL. I believe several actual secenarios were mentioned on some threads. The fact that it might be brought up as a hypothetical scenario proves nothing. We've ALL seen this happen, so it is not only a hypothetical scenario.... although it IS "unusual."

"A freeway is a multiple lane highway designed to move traffic along freely and quickly, usually by controlling access by interchanges as opposed to STOP lights."

It would follow that ANY interruption of the free flow of traffic on such a road, would be considered "unusual."

Please cite any part of this reg that mentions my OBLIGATION to do anything LIKE what you have suggested.

The list WAS about situations that didn't qualify, so it should have INCLUDED construction shutdowns, if they were a disqulified condition. Your comprehension skills are (not) showing. :lol:

Nope! You're quoting the GUIDANCE.... not the REG. It ALSO says....

"some allowances for unforeseen contingencies..."

A dispatcher SHOULD HAVE KNOWN about the collapse of both spans of I-10 following Katrina, and once before in Florida.... because it is all over the news, even though they weren't NOTIFIED of it. You cannot expect them to know about a 2 hour closure of an interstate in Godforsaken IOWA!! Likewise with the recent "weather" shutdowns of I-70 in eastern Colorado, but NOT a freak snowstorm that hits Donner pass in April!

Do I have to go find the thread and quote what you recently said about "asking a DOT officer?"

No???? I didn't THINK so! :lol:

Like I said, we may need a referee on this point. And I REALLY would like to see a definitive answer on it. However, I don't read ANYTHING in the REGS or the guidance that supports your stance. I'm quite conversant in the language, and I don't see ANY specific mention of what we are discussing. I do, however, see MANY references that seem to be inclusive of it.... and NONE that are exclusive!

Just as a hypothetical, and since they specifically used this term.... What do you say constitutes an "unusual traffic condition??"

The list was for "Emergency conditions", which is different than "Adverse conditions".

They could find out about the road construction, and if they know about the road construction, then they can easily deduce that the possibility is there that there will be a delay for it. That is the nature of road construction. It doesn't matter if the delay is for 10 minutes, or 10 hours. If you knew there was road construction (which you would have if you would have done proper trip planning), then you knew the possibility existed for the delay.

This is absolutely correct. Freak weather storms are listed in the adverse driving conditions, and are covered.

I could have just as easily said "Call the DOT in the state capital of your choice", but I figured this would be more fun.

Anybody but Dawn.

I've seen nothing in the DOT regs that state anything about construction zones being an "adverse driving condition".

Delays caused by backups due to accidents, sudden road damage (like a tanker blows up and creates a crater in the middle of the interstate), or weather related backups. Basically, anything that cannot be forseen would fall into this category.

I wouldn't call any sort of rush hour traffic, construction traffic, sports related traffic an "unusual traffic condition", as they are all things that can be forseen, as they are usually announced days (if not weeks) in advance. That goes for your shutdowns due to construction. If they are shutting down the highway for 2 hours due to construction, you can believe that they announced it prior to it happening. Heck - when they shut down I-43 in Milwaukee to MOVE CONES, they announced it weeks in advance.

Just because you fail to do your homework, doesn't give you a free pass to drive extra hours to make it up. Proper trip planning is the DUTY of every dispatcher and CDL holder.

My personal opinion is that the best solution would be to eliminate the adverse driving conditions clause altogether. It only serves to create a more dangerous environment, as it causes drivers to be on duty for longer than they normally would have.

I can see one case when construction could be considered an adverse condition. If they schedule a 1 hour shut down and it takes 2 for them to get the road open.

Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 4:57 pm Post subject:


"Unusual" is not a definition of "Adverse". Heck, it isn't even a synonym.


I bet you think that rush hour through Chicago qualifies for the Adverse Driving Conditions exemption. After all, traffic FREQUENTLY comes to a full stop for long periods of time. But it certainly isn't unusual (just like road closures in a construction zone aren't unusual).


Nope - I just know how to plan a trip, so I'm not "flying blind" like you are.

Even that would be a stretch. If you knew the road was shut down (or could have known, as it was a scheduled shut down), then you knew you would be delayed.

That's like saying that if you are heading into the mountains, and they say that the storm should pass through in 3 hours, and it takes 4 hours for the storm to pass, then you can use the adverse driving conditions. You can't - because you KNEW the storm was coming (just as you knew - or should have known - that the construction delays were there).

DOWN WITH THE ADVERSE DRIVING EXEMPTION!

Posted: Mon Mar 19, 2007 6:28 pm Post subject:

Rev.Vassago wrote:

"Unusual" is not a definition of "Adverse". Heck, it isn't even a synonym.

Never claimed it WAS a synomym. But, I would think it would often be a qualifier for an adverse situation (and so does the fmscsa, since THEY used the word!) I can't see how an adverse situation could be caused by a USUAL situation. But, perhaps you could enlighten me?


And I even went on to point out that anytime TRAFFIC comes to a full stop, for any length of time, on a FREEWAY.... it is UNUSUAL and qualifies for the ADVERSE condition exemption.


Nope. THAT would be something both driver and dispatch should KNOW about without being "notified." How long a period of time? 2 HOURS?? Without moving an inch?? I doubt it. And like you said.... it certainly isn't UNUSUAL, therefore it wouldn't qualify! But, complete road closures in a construction zone on a multiple lane freeway, which have NOT been advertised in advance (you've seen the electronic message boards giving dates of closures in advance, haven't you?...) certainly WOULD!

Again I ask, what part of "Unusual Road or TRAFFIC conditions" do you not understand? If it is USUAL for a freeway to be completely "shutdown" for 2 hours at a time, I'll eat my hat!

Unless of course, you or your dispatcher are psychic!!

I'm NEVER flying blind, Rev! I KNOW what to expect in most areas of the country that I drive in. Like I said, I don't know what part of the "limited" world YOU drive in.... but, where "I" drive, they don't "USUALLY" shut down the freeways completely for construction (unless they create DETOURS.)

Recently, I was in a "backup" going through Searchlight, NV. Two lanes, both north and south. It was SLOW, yes! But, though they were digging up the road at the main "square" in downtown, they had flagmen out and every now and then, they let 10 vehicles or so go through from each side. That is NOT A ROAD CLOSURE. It isn't even UNUSUAL for that area, as it has been going on as long as I've been driving! We were moving by inches, so I couldn't pop the breaks and break out the barbeque!

On the other hand.... though I wasn't there..... awhile back an entire section of overpass collapsed onto I-70 in Denver, CO. Stopped traffic in both directions for hours. THAT is one example of a "road closure." And it qualifies. And yes, it was in a construction zone. Anytime you are driving, without prior knowledge of a road closure - and especially if it was not planned - and for some reason, construction or otherwise, that road is completely closed down - traffic stopped for hours IN PLACE.... you can claim the "Adverse Driving Exemption." In fact, if you read the reg again, it says you can be COMPELLED to drive on after your hours are up! The DOT will NOT let you let your truck sit there blocking traffic just because your 11 hours are up!

I know how to trip plan, too! In fact, I've never been caught in such a situation as we've been discussing. I SURE as Heck would never be stupid enough to drive through Chicago at rush hour!

But, your insults and nitpicking notwithstanding.... the poster asked a question. I gave the correct answer.

It's been an interesting debate.... but I think we've covered it. Any more "delays" and we may have to take an "adverse posting exemption."

Close enough! :lol:

I agree. But, how about when they "schedule" NO HOURS shutdown, but they do it anyway? What difference do the hours make?

If the "scheduled" shutdown is not KNOWN to the dispatcher before dispatching the run, the regs are quite clear that it is an "unforeseen" situation that ADVERSELY affects the "scheduled" dispatch of the run.

Assuming that all runs are supposed to be dispatched based on some computer figuring out that there is time available to complete the run, the unforeseen "closure" of the road could impede the driver's ability to "COMPLETE THE RUN" or "get to a safe place to shutdown." (right out of the regs.)

[quote="Rev.Vassago"]Okay, let's start over right here. Emergency conditions are not "different than" adverse conditions. They are listed as #2 under 395.1 (b) Adverse conditions. So they are considered an "adverse condition."

They differ in that (per the reg) they FURTHER exempt the driver from the 2 hour provision and the 14 hour limits of 395.1 (b)(1) which covers "non-emergency" Adverse conditions. Since it says the run should OTHERWISE have been reasonably expected to be completed absent the emergency, I would suspect that the 11 hour rule applies, but it may not - given the circumstances. However, if the emergency causes an extension of time that THEN causes the driver to drive past the 14 hour limit, there is NO violation. [I expect alot of debate on this, but I'm quite sure I read it correctly - and we can put that debate off for an hour or so.]

Furthermore, there is NO definition of emergency situations in 395.2 "Definitions." So, the paragraph in the GUIDANCE was just to tell the DOT officers what NOT to accept as an excuse from a driver claiming some kind of emergency. It was TOO obvious that a driver couldn't claim a construction shutdown as an emergency situation.

Under 395.1 (b)(1) Adverse Conditions, it specifies the amount of extended time a driver may drive or be REQUIRED to drive, based on the definitions in 395.2. Which brings us back to the weather conditions which were well delineated, and the ambiguous term "Unusual road or traffic conditions which were not apparent on the basis of information that was KNOWN by the dispatcher." NOTE: Nothing is said about the driver's "Obligation" to know anything!

They could find out about the road construction,

They are under NO obligation to FIND out anything that they aren't aware of.

and if they know about the road construction, then they can easily deduce that the possibility is there that there will be a delay for it.

They are under NO obligation to DEDUCE or SPECULATE about anything. Besides.... we are not talking about DELAYS/slowdowns. We are talking about shutdowns.

That is the nature of road construction. It doesn't matter if the delay is for 10 minutes, or 10 hours.

Yes.... and no. 10 minutes can make the difference in not violating the rules, but I consider a 10 minute DELAY to be different than a 1-2 hour STOPPAGE. I'm quite sure that a 10 HOUR closure would necessitate a detour. Let's stay REAL here.

If you knew there was road construction (which you would have if you would have done proper trip planning), then you knew the possibility existed for the delay.

Again, I'm not talking about a little "delay." Obviously, we ALL deal with these on a daily basis. Nevertheless... there is STILL no obligation for the driver to know about anything! It's all on the dispatcher - per the regs.

This is absolutely correct. Freak weather storms are listed in the adverse driving conditions, and are covered.

Agreed. I only used that to differentiate between what a dispatcher might KNOW about.... and what was unforeseen.

I could have just as easily said "Call the DOT in the state capital of your choice", but I figured this would be more fun.

And it IS fun! Good suggestion though, I think I WILL call the NCDOT.

Anybody but Dawn.

:lol: :lol: :lol:

I've seen nothing in the DOT regs that state anything about construction zones being an "adverse driving condition".

That IS interesting, isn't it? I wonder why they weren't more specific about something that affects us everyday? It's not the ZONES themselves that I am referring to, as MOST of them allow for continuous movement, even if slow. But, perhaps it is BECAUSE they are so comonplace that the regs specifically say UNUSUAL traffic or ROAD conditions - which might indicate a complete stoppage.... affecting our schedules to a greater or major degree.

Delays caused by backups due to accidents, sudden road damage (like a tanker blows up and creates a crater in the middle of the interstate), or weather related backups. Basically, anything that cannot be forseen would fall into this category.

Weather related is covered elsewhere. I'm not talking about simple "delays." A sudden explosion of a tanker would be more of a traffic condition/accident than ROAD damage - but is a GOOD example. No... I think road damage is something that requires ALL lanes in a construction zone to be closed for a significant, yet unadvertised, period of time. Like a sinkhole, or perhaps a bridge collapse while under construction. My point is that ALL lanes of a freeway are NEVER closed intentionally without the creation of a detour.

I wouldn't call any sort of rush hour traffic, construction traffic, sports related traffic an "unusual traffic condition", as they are all things that can be forseen, as they are usually announced days (if not weeks) in advance.

All of this I agree with.

That goes for your shutdowns due to construction. If they are shutting down the highway for 2 hours due to construction, you can believe that they announced it prior to it happening.

This part I'm not so sure about. Sometimes things don't go as planned during road construction. Regardless.... if it is a local and UNUSUAL situation, there is no reason to believe that my dispatcher (or myself) knew about it in advance, and therefore I still believe it qualifies for the exemption. A simple evidenciary point might be whether or not they had pre-placed one of those lightbulb signs announcing it.

Heck - when they shut down I-43 in Milwaukee to MOVE CONES, they announced it weeks in advance.

:lol: :lol: :lol: Northerners ARE slow readers! :lol:

Just because you fail to do your homework, doesn't give you a free pass to drive extra hours to make it up. Proper trip planning is the DUTY of every dispatcher and CDL holder.

I agree about the trip planning. But, I maintain that there are many circumstances that one cannot be aware of... and if they affect your run to the tune of say... 2 hours, I believe there is broad coverage in the reg for this, and in fact, are the underlying REASON for the exemption to be placed in the regs.

My personal opinion is that the best solution would be to eliminate the adverse driving conditions clause altogether. It only serves to create a more dangerous environment, as it causes drivers to be on duty for longer than they normally would have.

You have a right to your opinion. But surely, you recognize that the purpose of the exemption is PRECISELY to avoid dangerous situations like truckers being stuck on the side of the road when they "otherwise" could have completed their run (even if just to a truckstop) SAFELY. And they ARE still required to stay within the Driving Window.

I think the entire Adverse Driving Exemption leaves way too many "what if's" and should be eliminated as it stands today, and replaced with either more specific wording, or some sort of exemption that allows a driver to get to a safe point to shut down (something the Adverse Driving Exemption doesn't even do if you get up to your 14 hours). Beyond that, it leaves too many holes that aren't explained in the FMCSA regs or interpretation. Perhaps the DOT occifers have some literature that further explains it.

Until someone proves it further, my opinion of it stands - it says NOTHING about construction delays, and therefore doesn't cover them. In fact, the only things that I am willing to acknowledge that it DOES cover are the things that it SPECIFICALLY states, which are:

snow
sleet
fog
a highway covered with snow or ice

Anything beyond that is looking for trouble.

I think if that were all the reg did, then it would be fine. But when it half-explains other uses for the reg, then it does the entire reg an injustice.

I think this is a pointless reason for the reg. Delays, unforseen situations, and slowdowns are par for the course in trucking. I count on them, and I usually have way more time than I need to complete my trips.

I left that out for a reason - it is open to interpretation that the FMCSA does not provide.

As long as people are trying to use the exemption to get "just a little further down the road", then I don't think the exemption serves the purpose that it was intended to do. If they eliminated all wording about "completing the trip", and kept only the wording about "gettting to a safe place", then I think the reg would be better suited.

As I was typing this, something jumped out at me, which I would like to explore further:

The way I interpret that, is that if you are on a multiple day trip, the only time you can use this exemption OTHER THAN TO GET TO A SAFE SPOT is when doing so will put you at your destination. The wording specifically states "in order to complete the run".

Ok - I'll toss a log on the fire...

What about an accident on the highway? Say you're 1/2 mile from a major accident that shuts down the highway (such as the wreck last week in FL). This shutdown lasts for 6hrs and because of your location on the highway they can't get you backed out to detour around. We'll just say you can't get backed out or detour because you're hauling a super-heavy load that mandates to the interstate because of low weight limits on area roads/bridges. I'll even specify: clear weather, 11am (to clear up that it's not a weather related shutdown).

You don't have it in your list above. Does that mean that the accident wouldn't qualify for "Adverse or Unusual Traffic Conditions"?

Normally I would have said "Yes" that it would, but then golfhobo mucked up that particular section by trying to make it apply to construction delays. :lol:

The way I interpret the reg (as it is written right now), is that a delay for an accident does fall under the Adverse Conditions Exemption if four things are true:

1. The delay occured after you were dispatched, or there was no way for dispatch to find out about it prior to dispatching you, and

2. You are not involved in the accident.

3. The delay keeps you from reaching your final destination, which could have been reached if the delay didn't exist.

4. The delay doesn't put you over your 14 hours.

For the scenario you presented, you could only use the Adverse Driving Exemption if the delay didn't put you over your 14 hours. A 6 hour delay may very well do so. If it does, then even the exemption doesn't help you - not even to get to a safe place. This is where it falls short, and why I think the only thing it should be used for is to find a safe place to park (with no limitation on the 14 hour rule).