Discussion:
Virginia... at it again ! <sigh>
(too old to reply)
me-not-you
2004-02-04 16:29:06 UTC
Permalink
They want the products, but they just don't want to have to deal with those
big slow trucks on their highways !



******************************************
Truck Limit On I-95 In Richmond?

Richmond Times-Dispatch Feb 4, 2004


City Councilman Peter R. Grimm says he has come up with a way to make
Richmond safer and cut down on traffic, noise and air pollution.

His idea: Ban certain truck traffic from Interstate 95 in the city.

"It is a plus, plus, plus situation," Grimm said.

The prohibition would apply to trucks that weigh more than 12,000 pounds and
are not delivering or picking up freight in the Richmond area or not
terminating or originating in the area. Truckers could use Interstate 295 as
an alternative, Grimm said.

Richmond and state police would enforce the prohibition when they catch
truckers violating other laws, Grimm said. Truckers who do not comply with
the ban should face "substantial" fines, according to Grimm, who has not
proposed specific amounts.

*************************************

http://www.timesdispatch.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=RTD%2FMGArticle%2FRTD_BasicArticle&c=MGArticle&cid=1031773482280
Richard
2004-02-04 16:47:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by me-not-you
They want the products, but they just don't want to have to deal with
those big slow trucks on their highways !
So? Atlanta Georgia already has a ban in effect.
Unless you have business within the city limits you do not go through town
on I-75.

Kentucky has banned trucks from "the hill" on I-75 leading into cincinnati a
couple of times.
Most major cities ban through hazmat shipments if they have a bypass
available.

I would have no squabbles with richmond if they implemented the ban.
295 runs parallel to 95 so it only adds a few miles. So what?
Quite frankly, richmond is a PITA to drive through anyway.
Alexander Cain
2004-02-04 19:16:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard
Post by me-not-you
They want the products, but they just don't want to have to deal with
those big slow trucks on their highways !
So? Atlanta Georgia already has a ban in effect.
Unless you have business within the city limits you do not go through town
on I-75.
You are, of course, wrong again.

Atlanta is considering placing a limit on the speed trucks can go in certain
areas.

There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.

You're a damn idiot, Bullis. Trucks make up a good percentage of vehicles
on Atlanta interstate property.
SloRide9430
2004-02-04 20:49:16 UTC
Permalink
From: "Alexander Cain"
You are, of course, wrong again.
Atlanta is considering placing a limit on the speed trucks can go in certain
areas.
There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.
No, St00pid Alex, YOU are wrong. Thru trucks over 6 wheels MUST use I-285.

Once again, you've prooved you don't know your ass from a hole in the ground.

BTW, Alex, got a job yet?


Safe truckin' !

Slo
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 65 days
2004-02-04 21:18:29 UTC
Permalink
Post by SloRide9430
. Thru trucks over 6 wheels MUST use I-285.
Wednesday January 28th, about 4:30 pm Eastern Standard Time, I was driving
south through Atlanta when all I could hear about on the CB was about an
accident on west bound I-285 near the 71 mile post. A truck had jackknifed
and blocked 3 lanes of traffic, then a car accident blocked the last lane.

They even had messages on the traffic boards telling people about the
accident and for them to use an alternate route. A lot of truckers were
talking about using I-75, through town, as their alternate route.

I was going to take I-75 straight through town, regardless of that 6 wheels
sign, if I had seen another truck do that. I didn't see anyone else go
through town, so I took I285 East instead. The traffic going West was
backed up for miles and miles.

I said something on the CB about "How about that Westbound parking lot?" and
nobody answered me.

There is no way I could have made it to Exit 201 before my 11 hours of
driving were up if I'd been stuck in that traffic. I probably would have
had to just park it right in the middle of the interstate and take my 10
hour break there.

Ricky
Roger
2004-02-04 22:02:17 UTC
Permalink
In that case I believe you can legally exceed your 11 hours of driving.
If I am wrong I am sure someone will correct me.
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 65 days
Post by SloRide9430
. Thru trucks over 6 wheels MUST use I-285.
Wednesday January 28th, about 4:30 pm Eastern Standard Time, I was driving
south through Atlanta when all I could hear about on the CB was about an
accident on west bound I-285 near the 71 mile post. A truck had jackknifed
and blocked 3 lanes of traffic, then a car accident blocked the last lane.
They even had messages on the traffic boards telling people about the
accident and for them to use an alternate route. A lot of truckers were
talking about using I-75, through town, as their alternate route.
I was going to take I-75 straight through town, regardless of that 6 wheels
sign, if I had seen another truck do that. I didn't see anyone else go
through town, so I took I285 East instead. The traffic going West was
backed up for miles and miles.
I said something on the CB about "How about that Westbound parking lot?" and
nobody answered me.
There is no way I could have made it to Exit 201 before my 11 hours of
driving were up if I'd been stuck in that traffic. I probably would have
had to just park it right in the middle of the interstate and take my 10
hour break there.
Ricky
Richard
2004-02-05 06:44:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Roger
In that case I believe you can legally exceed your 11 hours of driving.
If I am wrong I am sure someone will correct me.
The 2 hour extension can apply in that situation.
The way I see it, and would do it, is to show my accumulated time of driving
from what it would be normally, then log the rest of the time "off duty".
But with the new rule changes, I'd probably show it as "sleeper berth" time
now.

When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it, I
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
Alexander Cain
2004-02-05 07:52:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard
Post by Roger
In that case I believe you can legally exceed your 11 hours of driving.
If I am wrong I am sure someone will correct me.
The 2 hour extension can apply in that situation.
The way I see it, and would do it, is [SMACK!]
the wrong way.
John Morgan
2004-02-05 14:11:52 UTC
Permalink
"Richard" <***@127.000> wrote in message news:***@enews1.newsguy.com...
<snip>
Post by Richard
When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it, I
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
2004-02-05 15:13:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Morgan
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
John, how perfect does a log book have to be to make you happy?
Brian Smith
2004-02-05 15:21:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
John, how perfect does a log book have to be to make you happy?
A log book has to be filled out correctly, or it could make you very
unhappy.
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
2004-02-05 16:48:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
John, how perfect does a log book have to be to make you happy?
A log book has to be filled out correctly, or it could make you very
unhappy.
--
Brian
Next time, just give me a URL. Besides, I asked John how perfect it has to
be.

Others on this NG ask for Good Faith and I take that to mean 7 minutes off,
on some entries, is OK.

Ricky
Brian Smith
2004-02-05 19:08:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
Next time, just give me a URL. Besides, I asked John how perfect it has to
be.
What exactly is your problem? You asked a question. I gave you a reasonable,
common sense answer. Not everything in this world (common sense) has a web
site.
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
Others on this NG ask for Good Faith and I take that to mean 7 minutes off,
on some entries, is OK.
If you're trying to find out how to make your entries flawless and above
reproach, then make those entries honestly and accurately.
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
2004-02-05 23:51:48 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
Next time, just give me a URL. Besides, I asked John how perfect it has
to
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
be.
What exactly is your problem? You asked a question. I gave you a reasonable,
common sense answer. Not everything in this world (common sense) has a web
site.
Start over. I was talking about getting stuck in a major traffic jam with
hardly any driving time left.

Richard says how he would have handled it and John then accuses him of
falsifying his log.

So, I take it that both you and John support that the only thing I could do
was take a 10 hour break right on the expressway?

If you or John can not think of a better answer, then I suggest you not poke
fun at the only answer I was given.
Brian Smith
2004-02-06 11:10:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If you or John can not think of a better answer, then I suggest you not poke
fun at the only answer I was given.
If, you're saying that the only answer you were given was from Richard, then
what exactly are you learning from participating in this group? You've been
here for awhile now, and you haven't noticed all of the people that have and
are continually posting correct responses to Richard's posts? Why do you
think that is?
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
2004-02-06 13:19:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If you or John can not think of a better answer, then I suggest you not
poke
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
fun at the only answer I was given.
If, you're saying that the only answer you were given was from Richard, then
what exactly are you learning from participating in this group? You've been
here for awhile now, and you haven't noticed all of the people that have and
are continually posting correct responses to Richard's posts? Why do you
think that is?
--
Brian
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.

If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
Truckinsp
2004-02-06 13:40:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.
If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
Maybe he thinks you ought to have the common sense to figure that one out for
yourself.....

First of all, TIME MANAGEMENT!

Second of all, if an emergency situation arises that YOU COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN,
you are allowed extra time to finish your trip, but traffic foul-ups are a way
of life for truck drivers (to be VERY CLEAR traffic jams DO NOT COUNT as
emergency conditions) ....I'd thought you'd have figured that out for
yourself....but since you NEVER crack the regs yourself, here's a link.....
www.fmcsa.dot.gov
Look it up for your self....
Amy D
2004-02-06 16:25:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.
If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
Maybe he thinks you ought to have the common sense to figure that one out for
yourself.....
First of all, TIME MANAGEMENT!
Second of all, if an emergency situation arises that YOU COULD NOT HAVE KNOWN,
you are allowed extra time to finish your trip, but traffic foul-ups are a way
of life for truck drivers (to be VERY CLEAR traffic jams DO NOT COUNT as
emergency conditions) ....I'd thought you'd have figured that out for
yourself....but since you NEVER crack the regs yourself, here's a link.....
www.fmcsa.dot.gov
Look it up for your self....
I think Rookie has a valid question and didn't deserve that response.
:) Some traffic jams have nothing to do with time management -- and
since he IS new isn't familiar yet with all the typical jams.

So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?

amy
Truckinsp
2004-02-06 22:40:09 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
I think Rookie has a valid question and didn't deserve that response.
Maybe we just get tired of spoonfeeding the guy.....he's been told over and
over how to find things in the regs....
Post by Amy D
:) Some traffic jams have nothing to do with time management -- and
since he IS new isn't familiar yet with all the typical jams.
He's been driving for 4 months....I think he's seen some jams....
Post by Amy D
So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?
That was not a traffic jam, but are you telling me they didn't provide a
turnaround for vehicles but kept them at the scene for 8 hours????? We don't
do that here.....and if he was turned around, he should have been able to find
a place to get his 10 hours.....
Post by Amy D
amy
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
2004-02-06 22:58:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
I think Rookie has a valid question and didn't deserve that response.
Maybe we just get tired of spoonfeeding the guy.....he's been told over and
over how to find things in the regs....
Post by Amy D
:) Some traffic jams have nothing to do with time management -- and
since he IS new isn't familiar yet with all the typical jams.
He's been driving for 4 months....I think he's seen some jams....
Post by Amy D
So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?
That was not a traffic jam, but are you telling me they didn't provide a
turnaround for vehicles but kept them at the scene for 8 hours????? We don't
do that here.....and if he was turned around, he should have been able to find
a place to get his 10 hours.....
I've heard about places where there was no way to turn the trucks around and
they just had to wait and wait.

It is obvious, there is nothing in the law that allows for catastrophic
traffic tragedies and people on this NG, like you, Brian and John, keep
avoiding the issue that one could even come up.

Basically, you, Brian and John are saying, if you burn all your time up in a
7+ hour traffic jam there is nothing in the world you can do about it but
pay the fine for going over your hours.

Right?
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 00:19:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
It is obvious, there is nothing in the law that allows for catastrophic
traffic tragedies and people on this NG, like you, Brian and John, keep
avoiding the issue that one could even come up.
Why don't you go to 49 CFR 395 and look?
Brian Smith
2004-02-07 00:32:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Why don't you go to 49 CFR 395 and look?
You're wasting your breath. He doesn't understand what people are telling
him, and he refuses to look up anything on his own.
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
2004-02-07 02:22:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
It is obvious, there is nothing in the law that allows for catastrophic
traffic tragedies and people on this NG, like you, Brian and John, keep
avoiding the issue that one could even come up.
Why don't you go to 49 CFR 395 and look?
OK, I went to
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/español/english/pdfs/241453.htm

There was some interesting reading, but on the question I had, about all I
could find was:
OOIDA stated: ''The maximum available time of 14 hours that OOIDA
proposes is very reasonable and more than sufficient time to allow drivers
to
accomplish their work.''

It still looks like you are screwed under certain circumstances.
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 10:09:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
Post by Truckinsp
Why don't you go to 49 CFR 395 and look?
OK, I went to
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/español/english/pdfs/241453.htm
And THAT's the "regs" you read????? That was just the final rule and not the
complete copy of the regulations....

Are you a blond by any chance????

OK....try THIS site:

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rulesregs/fmcsr/fmcsrguide.htm

It has the REAL regs - all of them-except hazmat....and then click on 395 and
then click on 395.1 and then read paragraph (b): They are still the old HOS
regs but this particular regulation hasn't changed except for the 11 and 14
hour rules....

(b) Adverse driving conditions.

(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver who
encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and cannot,
because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the 10-hour (now
11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a) may drive and be
permitted or required to drive a commercial motor vehicle for not more than 2
additional hours in order to complete that run or to reach a place offering
safety for the occupants of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the
commercial motor vehicle and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or
be permitted to drive --

(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8 consecutive hours
off duty; or

Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty

(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8 consecutive hours
off duty.

Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...

(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may complete
his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the regulations in
this part, if such run reasonably could have been completed absent the
emergency.


So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation, you have
two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it in the time you
had left before the emergency..

I think being stuck in traffic behind a crashed hazmat truck would be
considered adverse conditions and something you could not predict.....but for 8
hours???? I doubt that because the emergency personnel would not want you
there...they would do everything possible to get you out of there...you are
just one more hazard they don't want to deal with in that situation.....we
close roads and back tractor-trailers up to get them out of situations like
that.....I cannot IMAGINE anyone leaving a semi sitting near something like
that....
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-07 12:17:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
Post by Truckinsp
Why don't you go to 49 CFR 395 and look?
OK, I went to
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/español/english/pdfs/241453.htm
And THAT's the "regs" you read????? That was just the final rule and not the
complete copy of the regulations....
Are you a blond by any chance????
http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rulesregs/fmcsr/fmcsrguide.htm
It has the REAL regs - all of them-except hazmat....and then click on 395 and
then click on 395.1 and then read paragraph (b): They are still the old HOS
regs but this particular regulation hasn't changed except for the 11 and 14
hour rules....
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver who
encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and cannot,
because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the 10-hour (now
11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a) may drive and be
permitted or required to drive a commercial motor vehicle for not more than 2
additional hours in order to complete that run or to reach a place offering
safety for the occupants of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the
commercial motor vehicle and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or
be permitted to drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8 consecutive hours
off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8 consecutive hours
off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may complete
his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the regulations in
this part, if such run reasonably could have been completed absent the
emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation, you have
two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it in the time you
had left before the emergency..
I think being stuck in traffic behind a crashed hazmat truck would be
considered adverse conditions and something you could not predict.....but for 8
hours???? I doubt that because the emergency personnel would not want you
there...they would do everything possible to get you out of there...you are
just one more hazard they don't want to deal with in that situation.....we
close roads and back tractor-trailers up to get them out of situations like
that.....I cannot IMAGINE anyone leaving a semi sitting near something like
that....
Thank you Truck,

From what I knew of the law, I thought that was the case, I was just hoping
there was a legal way out.

The other day, I stopped by the yard and went inside to turn in some paper
work. I saw someone at a table that I thought was another new driver.

I looked a little closer and saw him going through a bunch of old logs, then
I realized he was not a new driver.

I knew Iowa inspected logs like that, now I wonder if there are any States
that do not send an inspector out to a trucking company to look at the
paperwork.
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 12:38:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
The other day, I stopped by the yard and went inside to turn in some paper
work. I saw someone at a table that I thought was another new driver.
I looked a little closer and saw him going through a bunch of old logs, then
I realized he was not a new driver.
I knew Iowa inspected logs like that, now I wonder if there are any States
that do not send an inspector out to a trucking company to look at the
paperwork.
If the state inspectors are not authorized to do compliance reviews, then the
Feds in that state do them.
Amy D
2004-02-07 18:00:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
I think Rookie has a valid question and didn't deserve that response.
Maybe we just get tired of spoonfeeding the guy.....he's been told over and
over how to find things in the regs....
Post by Amy D
:) Some traffic jams have nothing to do with time management -- and
since he IS new isn't familiar yet with all the typical jams.
He's been driving for 4 months....I think he's seen some jams....
Post by Amy D
So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?
That was not a traffic jam, but are you telling me they didn't provide a
turnaround for vehicles but kept them at the scene for 8 hours????? We don't
do that here.....and if he was turned around, he should have been able to find
a place to get his 10 hours.....
Post by Amy D
amy
Let me see if I can find an article on it....but in sections there was
no possible way for people to get off the road. They were forced to
stay there.....

HOS hasn't been an issue yet but really sucks today! Ron could have
made it home for at least a day and a half but when he arrived at a
Walmart DC 120 miles from here yesterday to drop a trailer the company
had given him the wrong dock number <or something like that> and so he
sent a quaalcomm message and they sent two more numbers not knowing
which was the right one....by this time Walmart's computers had gone
down and wouldn't be able to figure out which number it is until they
came back up at 1 am....which by that point his 14 hours would be up and
he wouldn't be able to get to his shipper <who notoriously takes all day
to load but they would rather pay detention>. He would have had plenty
of time <had Walmart's computers not gone down> to check in and then
take his break while waiting all day for them to get to him. But since
he had to take his break before getting there he had to waste an entire
day because he couldn't drive there and check in until 9 am and still
has to wait the entire day....thus losing the chance to come home for a
day and a half. So, the HOS suck today. :) And it had nothing to do
with his time management.


amy
Amy D
2004-02-07 18:41:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
I think Rookie has a valid question and didn't deserve that response.
Maybe we just get tired of spoonfeeding the guy.....he's been told over and
over how to find things in the regs....
Post by Amy D
:) Some traffic jams have nothing to do with time management -- and
since he IS new isn't familiar yet with all the typical jams.
He's been driving for 4 months....I think he's seen some jams....
Post by Amy D
So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?
That was not a traffic jam, but are you telling me they didn't provide a
turnaround for vehicles but kept them at the scene for 8 hours????? We don't
do that here.....and if he was turned around, he should have been able to find
a place to get his 10 hours.....
Post by Amy D
amy
Okay, I can find articles about the actual leak and evacuation but I
can't find the local article that was about the number of cars and
trucks that were immobilized, told to keep their windows up and AC's
off. So, keeping in mind that big sections of I-10 are BRIDGES and
offer no turnaround how would it be logged?

And considering your response to the first question about it......if the
driver showed up two days later and you are inspecting his logs and see
this eight hour discrepancy and he told you he was forced to sit on I-10
for eight hours because of an ammonia leak would you assume he's lying?
Call and verify it? Lay a charge and make the poor guy go to court? Is
he supposed to get a permission slip from a DOT officer and carry it
with him since it wasn't covered under the regs? Is he supposed to log
it as an 8 hour break in the hammer lane of I-10 even though they COULD
move traffic at any time?

As far as "time management" accusations.....I've sat on the
21-mile-bridge in Lousiana for hours and hours several times. Are you
supposed to "anticipate" a half-day backup every time you venture
across? Absolutely, not -- 80% of the time you can get across it
easily. But the "traffic jams" are doozies. I'd say they are
"frequent" but not frequent enough to give yourself a half day to
cross. It's smart to always give yourself an extra hour or so going
through Baton Rouge......

amy
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 19:28:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Okay, I can find articles about the actual leak and evacuation but I
can't find the local article that was about the number of cars and
trucks that were immobilized, told to keep their windows up and AC's
off. So, keeping in mind that big sections of I-10 are BRIDGES and
offer no turnaround how would it be logged?
Amy, the point is emergency personnel CLEAR EVEN BRIDGES of cars and trucks
because they are considered hazards....and in case you DIDN'T know, the
emergency personnel HAVE to clear the scene around a hazmat spill the distance
the ERG requires, so they WON'T leave cars and trucks stuck there.....like I've
said before, we close the roads and back trucks up if they can't turn
around.... Truck and car drivers are told to keep their windows up OF COURSE
until they can be evacuated and it doesn't take 8 hours to evacuate a crash
site....I've been searching and I can find NO EVIDENCE of any crash where the
vehicles were made to sit for 8 hours....it just goes against the grain of
everything emergency personnel are taught to do....
Post by Amy D
And considering your response to the first question about it......if the
driver showed up two days later and you are inspecting his logs and see
this eight hour discrepancy and he told you he was forced to sit on I-10
for eight hours because of an ammonia leak would you assume he's lying?
I'd assume he wasn't being very truthful, yes.......the last thing in the world
an emergency person wants is a semi in the middle of their recovery efforts...
What I would believe is that the driver didn't want to use an alternate route
and so sits at a truck stop until the road is reopened, but THAT DOES NOT
constitute adverse conditions because he was able to get his truck to a safe
place.....
Post by Amy D
Call and verify it? Lay a charge and make the poor guy go to court? Is
he supposed to get a permission slip from a DOT officer and carry it
with him since it wasn't covered under the regs?
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell me
that.....
Post by Amy D
Is he supposed to log
it as an 8 hour break in the hammer lane of I-10 even though they COULD
move traffic at any time?
I don't have a clue what you are talking about here..... if the guy is sitting
in the hammer lane when traffic could be moving, my guess is that the emergency
personnel are going to be really pissed......
Post by Amy D
As far as "time management" accusations.....I've sat on the
21-mile-bridge in Lousiana for hours and hours several times.
Then you know that it is to be expected that that will happen again and so I'd
hardly call that an unexpected occurrence....
Post by Amy D
Are you
supposed to "anticipate" a half-day backup every time you venture
across? Absolutely, not -- 80% of the time you can get across it
easily. But the "traffic jams" are doozies. I'd say they are
"frequent" but not frequent enough to give yourself a half day to
cross. It's smart to always give yourself an extra hour or so going
through Baton Rouge......
Again, you are saying it is an expected occurance and not something that could
not be predicted....
Post by Amy D
amy
Amy D
2004-02-07 20:39:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Okay, I can find articles about the actual leak and evacuation but I
can't find the local article that was about the number of cars and
trucks that were immobilized, told to keep their windows up and AC's
off. So, keeping in mind that big sections of I-10 are BRIDGES and
offer no turnaround how would it be logged?
Amy, the point is emergency personnel CLEAR EVEN BRIDGES of cars and trucks
because they are considered hazards....and in case you DIDN'T know, the
emergency personnel HAVE to clear the scene around a hazmat spill the distance
the ERG requires, so they WON'T leave cars and trucks stuck there.....like I've
said before, we close the roads and back trucks up if they can't turn
around.... Truck and car drivers are told to keep their windows up OF COURSE
until they can be evacuated and it doesn't take 8 hours to evacuate a crash
site....I've been searching and I can find NO EVIDENCE of any crash where the
vehicles were made to sit for 8 hours....it just goes against the grain of
everything emergency personnel are taught to do....
Post by Amy D
And considering your response to the first question about it......if the
driver showed up two days later and you are inspecting his logs and see
this eight hour discrepancy and he told you he was forced to sit on I-10
for eight hours because of an ammonia leak would you assume he's lying?
I'd assume he wasn't being very truthful, yes.......the last thing in the world
an emergency person wants is a semi in the middle of their recovery efforts...
What I would believe is that the driver didn't want to use an alternate route
and so sits at a truck stop until the road is reopened, but THAT DOES NOT
constitute adverse conditions because he was able to get his truck to a safe
place.....
Okay, we live on the coast. We are not talking a hazmat "spill" we are
talking a humongous tank and they had to wait for a huge cloud to be
recovered from the air or dissipated. Fine, I will search high and low
until I get you PROOF they made these people sit there. I will post you
the link to the evacuation scene....maybe you will realize it is way
bigger than a hazmat truck spilling.
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Call and verify it? Lay a charge and make the poor guy go to court? Is
he supposed to get a permission slip from a DOT officer and carry it
with him since it wasn't covered under the regs?
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell me
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare occurence. I'm
only asking you what you would do if it happened since it CAN happen.
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Is he supposed to log
it as an 8 hour break in the hammer lane of I-10 even though they COULD
move traffic at any time?
I don't have a clue what you are talking about here..... if the guy is sitting
in the hammer lane when traffic could be moving, my guess is that the emergency
personnel are going to be really pissed......
Post by Amy D
As far as "time management" accusations.....I've sat on the
21-mile-bridge in Lousiana for hours and hours several times.
Then you know that it is to be expected that that will happen again and so I'd
hardly call that an unexpected occurrence....
So we are supposed to schedule a half day to go 21 miles just because
someone burnt up their RV? The next time a JB truck went off the
bridge? Another time a couple cars tangled up? No, it's not an
"expected" occurence. Baton Rouge is an "expected" occurence. Okay,
how many drivers would give themselves 1/2 day to cross the 21 mile
bridge in Louisiana? Shoot any piece of road anywhere in the country
has had accidents and don't need to be considered "expected"
occurences. But if you drive the same piece of road again and again you
have more of an opportunity to run into a backup for an accident. Let's
say Rookie has taken the 21 mile bridge 3 times and never encountered a
backup -- how on earth would he "expect" a half-day backup and plan for
it?
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Are you
supposed to "anticipate" a half-day backup every time you venture
across? Absolutely, not -- 80% of the time you can get across it
easily. But the "traffic jams" are doozies. I'd say they are
"frequent" but not frequent enough to give yourself a half day to
cross. It's smart to always give yourself an extra hour or so going
through Baton Rouge......
Again, you are saying it is an expected occurance and not something that could
not be predicted....
Post by Amy D
amy
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 21:34:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell me
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare occurence. I'm
only asking you what you would do if it happened since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the sky
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....


Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's" and
I'm not really interested......
Amy D
2004-02-07 22:15:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell me
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare occurence. I'm
only asking you what you would do if it happened since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the sky
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's" and
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong with
answering a hypothetical question, anyway?

amy
Truckinsp
2004-02-07 22:33:41 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare occurence. I'm
only asking you what you would do if it happened since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong with
answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard answer" for
them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask them? But in this case,
I believe you are just trying to start an argument with me since ga dispatcher
isn't available, and I don't really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Amy D
2004-02-08 04:13:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare occurence. I'm
only asking you what you would do if it happened since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong with
answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard answer" for
them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask them? But in this case,
I believe you are just trying to start an argument with me since ga dispatcher
isn't available, and I don't really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....

1. How would you log it?

2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?

amy
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-08 10:44:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
I doubt if that question will ever be answered. John, Brian and truck have
done a real good job at staying away from the question.

John just puts Richard down.

Brian says he does not care about 11 hours because he can drive 13.

Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."

I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are supposed
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another driver
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
Leon
2004-02-08 12:03:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Post by Amy D
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
I doubt if that question will ever be answered. John, Brian and truck have
done a real good job at staying away from the question.
John just puts Richard down.
Brian says he does not care about 11 hours because he can drive 13.
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are supposed
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another driver
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
If you want to know how I would handle it it really quite simple. Log it
line 4 (On Duty - Not Driving). Then when I could move I'd log line 3
(Driving). Make a notation of what happened in the Remarks sections. If
the Driving was done after my 14 hours I would continue to the nearest exit
call my dispatcher and advise him/her what has happened then take my 10
hours Off Duty (Line 1). In fact I would call my dispatcher as soon as I
saw I was going to be tied up for an extended time. Keep your dispatcher
advised as to what is happening.

Now you might ask about moving the truck while I was logged On Duty - Not
Driving. Well it's no problem. It would fall under the same condition as
when you are waiting in line at a warehouse. If your status is less than 7
minutes you don't have to show the change in status. I would assume you
don't log Driving while you are waiting in line just because you are seating
in the driver's seat.

I would doubt that there would be a DOT officer that would do more than ask
a question or two about such a log entry if the Remarks section clearly
explained what happened. It's called logging LEGAL. You know putting down
in the logbook what you did.

If it was 7 hours long I'd say you are going to be late to your next stop so
your dispatcher would need to contact the customer and get a new time.

Now see how simple it is. Just apply a little common sense. Quite thinking
that every DOT cop is out to write you a citation. Last time I checked they
are humans just like truck drivers. As an example I have had them send me
on down the road when I was over-weight without so much as a warning. Go
into the scale house with an attitude and you'll get a attitude ticket right
quick. Go in with a logical excuse and most will accept your excuse.

Same goes for getting along in the company. You cop an attitude and the
response will be accordingly.

Leon
Truckinsp
2004-02-08 12:46:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are
supposed
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another
driver
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
If you want to know how I would handle it it really quite simple. Log it
line 4 (On Duty - Not Driving). Then when I could move I'd log line 3
(Driving). Make a notation of what happened in the Remarks sections.
Er....you'd be wrong.....

http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/rulesregs/fmcsr/regs/interp395.2.htm

Question 25: When a driver experiences a delay on an impassable highway, should
the time he/she is delayed be entered on the record of duty status as driving
time or on-duty (not driving)?

Guidance: Delays on impassable highways must be recorded as driving time
because §395.2 defines "driving time" as all time spent at the driving controls
of a CMV in operation.
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Now you might ask about moving the truck while I was logged On Duty - Not
Driving. Well it's no problem. It would fall under the same condition as
when you are waiting in line at a warehouse.
Again, when you are at the controls of the vehicle, you MUST log driving...

If your status is less than 7
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
minutes you don't have to show the change in status. I would assume you
don't log Driving while you are waiting in line just because you are seating
in the driver's seat.
I would doubt that there would be a DOT officer that would do more than ask
a question or two about such a log entry if the Remarks section clearly
explained what happened. It's called logging LEGAL. You know putting down
in the logbook what you did.
And most DOT officers would give you credit for trying to be legal......and
hopefully would not cite you....this would be an EXTREMELY rare occurrence and
if you were truly stuck for 8 hours in a traffic pileup (unlikely, but it
theoretically COULD happen) and your vehicle COULD NOT BE MOVED, they would
understand that there was NO WAY for you to get off the highway and fulfill the
HOS requirements...
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If it was 7 hours long I'd say you are going to be late to your next stop so
your dispatcher would need to contact the customer and get a new time.
Now see how simple it is. Just apply a little common sense. Quite thinking
that every DOT cop is out to write you a citation. Last time I checked they
are humans just like truck drivers. As an example I have had them send me
on down the road when I was over-weight without so much as a warning. Go
into the scale house with an attitude and you'll get a attitude ticket right
quick. Go in with a logical excuse and most will accept your excuse.
Same goes for getting along in the company. You cop an attitude and the
response will be accordingly.
Leon
Thank you for the kind words, Leon.....my point in this issue was to get Rookie
to go and search the regs himself and to use some common sense.....there is NO
WAY that the Feds can write rules for every hypothetical situation that he
thinks up.....he really does have to start thinking for himself and start using
some common sense if he's going to be a professional driver....
Leon
2004-02-08 13:09:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are
supposed
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another
driver
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
If you want to know how I would handle it it really quite simple. Log it
line 4 (On Duty - Not Driving). Then when I could move I'd log line 3
(Driving). Make a notation of what happened in the Remarks sections.
Er....you'd be wrong.....
OK I stand corrected.

<<<<<< section deleted >>>>>>
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
I would doubt that there would be a DOT officer that would do more than ask
a question or two about such a log entry if the Remarks section clearly
explained what happened. It's called logging LEGAL. You know putting down
in the logbook what you did.
And most DOT officers would give you credit for trying to be
legal......and
Post by Truckinsp
hopefully would not cite you....this would be an EXTREMELY rare occurrence and
if you were truly stuck for 8 hours in a traffic pileup (unlikely, but it
theoretically COULD happen) and your vehicle COULD NOT BE MOVED, they would
understand that there was NO WAY for you to get off the highway and fulfill the
HOS requirements...
To me it would be more as to what the driver did AFTER the occurrence and
like I said the attitude the driver showed when (IF) they were confronted by
a DOT officer. I've dealt with goverment officials most of my life and I
can truthfully say I have only dealt with two that let their position go to
their head. I know it's hard to believe but goverment officials do have
commen sense. What they won't take is BS. Most have seen it all and know
what really is going on.

If I got a citation I'd just chalk it up as one time I got caught. Kinda
like a speeding ticket.
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If it was 7 hours long I'd say you are going to be late to your next stop so
your dispatcher would need to contact the customer and get a new time.
Now see how simple it is. Just apply a little common sense. Quite thinking
that every DOT cop is out to write you a citation. Last time I checked they
are humans just like truck drivers. As an example I have had them send me
on down the road when I was over-weight without so much as a warning. Go
into the scale house with an attitude and you'll get a attitude ticket right
quick. Go in with a logical excuse and most will accept your excuse.
Same goes for getting along in the company. You cop an attitude and the
response will be accordingly.
Leon
Thank you for the kind words, Leon.....my point in this issue was to get Rookie
to go and search the regs himself and to use some common sense.....there is NO
WAY that the Feds can write rules for every hypothetical situation that he
thinks up.....he really does have to start thinking for himself and start using
some common sense if he's going to be a professional driver....
Not kind words just the truth. It appears Rookie has several problems. And
at the top of the list is attitude. I have seen this attitude before and
I'm sure I'll see it again.

As the old saying goes. Common sense is the most uncommon sense most people
have.

Leon
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-08 14:36:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon
Not kind words just the truth. It appears Rookie has several problems.
And
Post by Leon
at the top of the list is attitude. I have seen this attitude before and
I'm sure I'll see it again.
As the old saying goes. Common sense is the most uncommon sense most people
have.
Leon
You people are funny. Just because I complain on this NG does not mean I am
always like that.

I have been in a quite a few circumstances where someone will tell me, I
thought you were going to complain, or a lot of drivers would have thrown a
fuss.

On the job, when I am dealing with a dispatcher, shipper, consignor, or a
DOT officer, they are always right. If they say "jump" you ask how far.
That is part of the reason I didn't try to correct a DOT officer when he did
not apply the 34 hour reset rule. If he had tried to write me a ticket on
my log book I might have said something.

I think that is also part of the reason I am still working, when a friend of
mine was let go for about the same thing I went through.

Most all my complaints deal with the internal politics of the company, and
even there, I am not as worried about them as I might have sounded to begin
with.

My friends call me Ricky. ;-)
Amy D
2004-02-08 19:26:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 65 days
Post by Leon
Not kind words just the truth. It appears Rookie has several problems.
And
Post by Leon
at the top of the list is attitude. I have seen this attitude before and
I'm sure I'll see it again.
As the old saying goes. Common sense is the most uncommon sense most
people
Post by Leon
have.
Leon
You people are funny. Just because I complain on this NG does not mean I am
always like that.
I have been in a quite a few circumstances where someone will tell me, I
thought you were going to complain, or a lot of drivers would have thrown a
fuss.
On the job, when I am dealing with a dispatcher, shipper, consignor, or a
DOT officer, they are always right. If they say "jump" you ask how far.
That is part of the reason I didn't try to correct a DOT officer when he did
not apply the 34 hour reset rule. If he had tried to write me a ticket on
my log book I might have said something.
I think that is also part of the reason I am still working, when a friend of
mine was let go for about the same thing I went through.
Most all my complaints deal with the internal politics of the company, and
even there, I am not as worried about them as I might have sounded to begin
with.
My friends call me Ricky. ;-)
LOL...don't mind them. My husband is Mr. Coolest of Cool when dealing
with DOT, dispatchers, shippers, receivers, etc. I've even watched him
defuse a situation with a California trooper who had an incredibly bad
attitude and honestly the cop didn't deserve his understanding. Doesn't
mean he doesn't rant and rave to me on the phone. :) Everyone needs an
outlet....unfortunately half the people here can't see beyond the words
on the screen. :)

Don't worry about how people "judge" you......a lesson I am teaching
myself this week. You know the truth and ignore the belittling
comments. Take what you need and leave the rest and ignore all comments
about personal character from anyone you don't know face-to-face.

And don't forget......many have selective memory to their "rookie days"
and many don't have any idea what it is like to be a rookie NOWADAYS.

Take the conversations about newbies asking "I'm starting at so and so
Monday -- any opinions?" They can't comprehend how that happens. Well,
when you have fresh starry-eyed newbies armed only with knowledge from
newspaper headhunters and then recruiters at school they don't even
realize all the bad things IN the industry. It's really not their
fault. They didn't grow up in the industry and have no clue at that
point that headhunters and recruiters are professional con artists whose
only goal is to provide fresh meat. Only after they get out there are
they even capable of being aware of what's going on. How can they even
ASK questions about something they have no clue about. How do they even
know where to ask. This isn't a good place......newbies are treated as
stupid. You don't gain insight into the trucking industry
overnight.....and the typical places they can think to ask are
controlled by recruiters. Shoot, even at the guidance counsellor at
high school. I'm sure they have a bunch of glossy ads from recruiters
for driving school to hand out to the batch of kids that aren't going to
college.....kind of like the military. Plenty go into the military for
"free education, etc"......fortunately, you can GET out of trucking if
you find out it's not all the glossy ad made it out to be. Unless, you
stay too long........and then you'll become a bitter, cynical old man.
:)



amy
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-08 21:34:11 UTC
Permalink
"Amy D" <***@joimail.com> wrote in message news:***@joimail.com...
- - - snipped but not forgotten - - -
Post by Amy D
...fortunately, you can GET out of trucking if
you find out it's not all the glossy ad made it out to be. Unless, you
stay too long........and then you'll become a bitter, cynical old man.
:)
amy
LOL.

If I work 14 hour days and sleep 10, that does not leave me a lot of time to
look for work elsewhere.

I have an idea though. I'm going to start using the headphones I bought for
my cell phone and start making more calls while driving. ;-)

Ricky
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-08 13:41:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Thank you for the kind words, Leon.....my point in this issue was to get Rookie
to go and search the regs himself and to use some common sense.....there is NO
WAY that the Feds can write rules for every hypothetical situation that he
thinks up.....he really does have to start thinking for himself and start using
some common sense if he's going to be a professional driver....
I thought Amy asked the quesiton.

BTW, you can call me Ricky.
Amy D
2004-02-08 18:51:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Thank you for the kind words, Leon.....my point in this issue was to get
Rookie
Post by Truckinsp
to go and search the regs himself and to use some common sense.....there
is NO
Post by Truckinsp
WAY that the Feds can write rules for every hypothetical situation that he
thinks up.....he really does have to start thinking for himself and start
using
Post by Truckinsp
some common sense if he's going to be a professional driver....
I thought Amy asked the quesiton.
BTW, you can call me Ricky.
You are right. It was my question.

amy
Amy D
2004-02-08 18:46:18 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Post by Amy D
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
I doubt if that question will ever be answered. John, Brian and truck
have
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
done a real good job at staying away from the question.
John just puts Richard down.
Brian says he does not care about 11 hours because he can drive 13.
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are
supposed
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another
driver
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
If you want to know how I would handle it it really quite simple. Log it
line 4 (On Duty - Not Driving). Then when I could move I'd log line 3
(Driving). Make a notation of what happened in the Remarks sections. If
the Driving was done after my 14 hours I would continue to the nearest exit
call my dispatcher and advise him/her what has happened then take my 10
hours Off Duty (Line 1). In fact I would call my dispatcher as soon as I
saw I was going to be tied up for an extended time. Keep your dispatcher
advised as to what is happening.
Now you might ask about moving the truck while I was logged On Duty - Not
Driving. Well it's no problem. It would fall under the same condition as
when you are waiting in line at a warehouse. If your status is less than 7
minutes you don't have to show the change in status. I would assume you
don't log Driving while you are waiting in line just because you are seating
in the driver's seat.
I would doubt that there would be a DOT officer that would do more than ask
a question or two about such a log entry if the Remarks section clearly
explained what happened. It's called logging LEGAL. You know putting down
in the logbook what you did.
If it was 7 hours long I'd say you are going to be late to your next stop so
your dispatcher would need to contact the customer and get a new time.
Now see how simple it is. Just apply a little common sense. Quite thinking
that every DOT cop is out to write you a citation. Last time I checked they
are humans just like truck drivers. As an example I have had them send me
on down the road when I was over-weight without so much as a warning. Go
into the scale house with an attitude and you'll get a attitude ticket right
quick. Go in with a logical excuse and most will accept your excuse.
Same goes for getting along in the company. You cop an attitude and the
response will be accordingly.
Leon
Thank you.

amy
Leon
2004-02-08 21:42:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Post by Amy D
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
I doubt if that question will ever be answered. John, Brian and truck
have
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
done a real good job at staying away from the question.
John just puts Richard down.
Brian says he does not care about 11 hours because he can drive 13.
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are
supposed
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another
driver
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
If you want to know how I would handle it it really quite simple. Log it
line 4 (On Duty - Not Driving). Then when I could move I'd log line 3
(Driving). Make a notation of what happened in the Remarks sections.
If
Post by Amy D
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
the Driving was done after my 14 hours I would continue to the nearest exit
call my dispatcher and advise him/her what has happened then take my 10
hours Off Duty (Line 1). In fact I would call my dispatcher as soon as I
saw I was going to be tied up for an extended time. Keep your dispatcher
advised as to what is happening.
Now you might ask about moving the truck while I was logged On Duty - Not
Driving. Well it's no problem. It would fall under the same condition as
when you are waiting in line at a warehouse. If your status is less than 7
minutes you don't have to show the change in status. I would assume you
don't log Driving while you are waiting in line just because you are seating
in the driver's seat.
I would doubt that there would be a DOT officer that would do more than ask
a question or two about such a log entry if the Remarks section clearly
explained what happened. It's called logging LEGAL. You know putting down
in the logbook what you did.
If it was 7 hours long I'd say you are going to be late to your next stop so
your dispatcher would need to contact the customer and get a new time.
Now see how simple it is. Just apply a little common sense. Quite thinking
that every DOT cop is out to write you a citation. Last time I checked they
are humans just like truck drivers. As an example I have had them send me
on down the road when I was over-weight without so much as a warning.
Go
Post by Amy D
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
into the scale house with an attitude and you'll get a attitude ticket right
quick. Go in with a logical excuse and most will accept your excuse.
Same goes for getting along in the company. You cop an attitude and the
response will be accordingly.
Leon
Thank you.
amy
If you read the other thread you saw I was in error on logging the time as
ON Duty - Not Driving (Line 4). It should be logged as Driving (Line 3).

In either case I would make a mote in the Remarks sections that explained
what happened and give enough details that they would understand why I did
what I did. Again DOT officers are not out to cite a driver if the driver
can explain the whys.

Leon
Rookie with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-09 01:07:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon
If you read the other thread you saw I was in error on logging the time as
ON Duty - Not Driving (Line 4). It should be logged as Driving (Line 3).
In either case I would make a mote in the Remarks sections that explained
what happened and give enough details that they would understand why I did
what I did. Again DOT officers are not out to cite a driver if the driver
can explain the whys.
Leon
That sounds good, but what happens if they can not find out what happened?

I have seen a car run into the back of a Tanker, on a bridge and held up
traffic for miles and miles. People I knew that were were stuck further
back, told me stories of people getting out of their cars and selling things
since that traffic was at a complete stop.

The story was on the radio, since I was closer to the start of it, I managed
to get a photo of it, but it never made it to the paper. An OTR driver,
stuck further back in that hold up, might not ever be able to validate it.

I am thinking of using a 12 volt VCR and a cheap camera to record problem
areas with traffic holdups or crazy drivers that love to get in front of you
and force you to slow down.

Any other ideas?

thanx

Ricky
Amy D
2004-02-08 18:44:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 60 days
Post by Amy D
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
I doubt if that question will ever be answered. John, Brian and truck have
done a real good job at staying away from the question.
John just puts Richard down.
Brian says he does not care about 11 hours because he can drive 13.
Truck down plays it with the words "hypothetical question."
I guess if you are stuck in traffic, for more than 7 hours, you are supposed
to call for a police escort to the nearest rest area, or have another driver
brought to your truck, via helicopter. ;-)
I think you are right and glad you can at least see where I'm asking
from. LOL--thought I was losing my mind for a moment. :)

I looked back through google to see where I had originally posted about
this last year when it happened in the "logging jams" thread and
realized no one answered THEN either.

So, since MSDOT knows what I am talking about I'll ask them how they
would have advised to log such a thing last year when it happened, how
they would advise logging it now with the new HOS, and how to notate
something like that so a truck inspector or DOT officer believes it two
days later. Or what to do if you reach your 14 hours while sitting on a
bridge.

Dave? The other DOT officer? <sorry, forgot your name> :)

Now, since I honestly don't know, how do you log it when you use the
extra couple hours during weather-related incidents? Flag it? No one
questions it two days later?



amy
Sarge
2004-02-08 16:28:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?

Thanks,
Sarge

(b) Adverse driving conditions.

(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --

(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or

Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty

(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.

Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...

(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.


So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Amy D
2004-02-08 19:31:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sarge
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
THanks, actually that's what I thought the answer was "could complete
the run if it could have been completed" according to the FMCSR that
Truckinsp posted. I just couldn't understand why he was so cantankerous
about it -- he was acting like that particular reg wouldn't cover it.

amy
Sarge
2004-02-08 20:31:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
[...]
THanks, actually that's what I thought the answer was "could complete
the run if it could have been completed" according to the FMCSR that
Truckinsp posted. I just couldn't understand why he was so cantankerous
about it -- he was acting like that particular reg wouldn't cover it.
amy
Amy,

What I put in my message was a cut and paste from an earlier message in the
thread from truckinsp. Maybe if you reread his responses you'll see it more
clearly on a second read.

Sarge
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Amy D
2004-02-09 04:07:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
[...]
THanks, actually that's what I thought the answer was "could complete
the run if it could have been completed" according to the FMCSR that
Truckinsp posted. I just couldn't understand why he was so cantankerous
about it -- he was acting like that particular reg wouldn't cover it.
amy
Amy,
What I put in my message was a cut and paste from an earlier message in the
thread from truckinsp. Maybe if you reread his responses you'll see it more
clearly on a second read.
Sarge
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
I know...that is what I said....we are missing each other. :) I read
the same thing you posted in HIS post but he was still acting like it
didn't apply.....

amy
Amy D
2004-02-08 19:34:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sarge
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Wait, according to that reg it says you may complete the run if you
could have completed it had the emergency situation not occurred. Is it
"two hours" or "complete the run"?

amy
Leon
2004-02-08 21:36:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try
to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on "what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sarge
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Wait, according to that reg it says you may complete the run if you
could have completed it had the emergency situation not occurred. Is it
"two hours" or "complete the run"?
amy
I think you are selective reading Amy. Note the above:
"(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver who
encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and cannot,
because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the 10-hour (now
11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a) MAY DRIVE AND BE
PERMITTED OR REQUIRED TO DRIVE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE FOR NOT MORE THAN
2 ADDITIONAL HOURS IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THAT RUN OR TO REACH A PLACE
OFFERING SAFETY FOR THE OCCUPANTS OF THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND
SECURITY FOR THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND ITS CARGO. However, that
driver may not drive or be permitted to drive --"

Notice the part I put in Caps. "not more than 2 additional hours in order
to complete that run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants
of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor
vehicle and its cargo"

You get to drive to the closer of two points. Either the end of the run or
a safe place. Notice the rule says "NOT MORE THAN". It doesn't say you
have 2 additional hours. You get to drive to the closest safe place or the
end of the run which ever is closest.

Leon
Amy D
2004-02-09 04:10:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by Leon
Post by Amy D
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try
to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen
that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on
"what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sarge
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Wait, according to that reg it says you may complete the run if you
could have completed it had the emergency situation not occurred. Is it
"two hours" or "complete the run"?
amy
"(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver who
encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and cannot,
because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the 10-hour (now
11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a) MAY DRIVE AND BE
PERMITTED OR REQUIRED TO DRIVE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE FOR NOT MORE THAN
2 ADDITIONAL HOURS IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THAT RUN OR TO REACH A PLACE
OFFERING SAFETY FOR THE OCCUPANTS OF THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND
SECURITY FOR THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND ITS CARGO. However, that
driver may not drive or be permitted to drive --"
Notice the part I put in Caps. "not more than 2 additional hours in order
to complete that run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants
of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor
vehicle and its cargo"
You get to drive to the closer of two points. Either the end of the run or
a safe place. Notice the rule says "NOT MORE THAN". It doesn't say you
have 2 additional hours. You get to drive to the closest safe place or the
end of the run which ever is closest.
Leon
Thanks. I see it now. :)

amy
Amy D
2004-02-09 04:50:17 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Post by Leon
Post by Amy D
Post by Sarge
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
Now you are just being dramatic.....I've never had a driver try
to tell
me
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
Post by Truckinsp
that.....
I'm sure you haven't because I'm sure it is a very rare
occurence. I'm only asking you what you would do if it happened
since it CAN happen.
And it can happen that a meteor hits a truck, and it can happen
that the
sky
Post by Truckinsp
falls in, and it can happen that the sun explodes....
Amy, I think you are just trying to start an argument based on
"what if's"
and
Post by Truckinsp
I'm not really interested......
It's not a "what if"....it DID happen......I'll get you the
proof.....just give me a little time, sweetie....and what's wrong
with answering a hypothetical question, anyway?
amy
Every "hypothetical question" is different, there isn't a "standard
answer" for them.....why don't you call the fmcsa hotline and ask
them? But in this case, I believe you are just trying to start an
argument with me since ga dispatcher isn't available, and I don't
really want to go there.....find someone else.....
And don't call me "sweetie" unless you mean it.....remember that?
Ummm....the questions were really simple.....
1. How would you log it?
2. How would YOU handle it if you encountered the log?
amy
Amy,
What am I missing?
Thanks,
Sarge
(b) Adverse driving conditions.
(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver
who encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and
cannot, because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the
10-hour (now 11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a)
may drive and be permitted or required to drive a commercial motor
vehicle for not more than 2 additional hours in order to complete that
run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants of the
commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor vehicle
and its cargo. However, that driver may not drive or be permitted to
drive --
(b)(1)(i) For more than 12 hours in the aggregate following 8
consecutive hours off duty; or
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty
(b)(1)(ii) After he/she has been on duty 15 hours following 8
consecutive hours off duty.
Now the reg states 10 consecutive hours off duty...
(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.
So what that means is that IF you get stuck in an emergency situation,
you have two more hours to finish your run IF you could have finished it
in the time you had left before the emergency..
--
If it walks like a duck .... you know the rest.
Wait, according to that reg it says you may complete the run if you
could have completed it had the emergency situation not occurred. Is it
"two hours" or "complete the run"?
amy
"(b)(1) Except as provided in paragraph (i)(2) of this section, a driver who
encounters adverse driving conditions, as defined in § 395.2 , and cannot,
because of those conditions, safely complete the run within the 10-hour (now
11- hour) maximum driving time permitted by § 395.3(a) MAY DRIVE AND BE
PERMITTED OR REQUIRED TO DRIVE A COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE FOR NOT MORE THAN
2 ADDITIONAL HOURS IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THAT RUN OR TO REACH A PLACE
OFFERING SAFETY FOR THE OCCUPANTS OF THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND
SECURITY FOR THE COMMERCIAL MOTOR VEHICLE AND ITS CARGO. However, that
driver may not drive or be permitted to drive --"
Notice the part I put in Caps. "not more than 2 additional hours in order
to complete that run or to reach a place offering safety for the occupants
of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial motor
vehicle and its cargo"
You get to drive to the closer of two points. Either the end of the run or
a safe place. Notice the rule says "NOT MORE THAN". It doesn't say you
have 2 additional hours. You get to drive to the closest safe place or the
end of the run which ever is closest.
Leon
Thanks. I see it now. :)
amy
No, wait a minute, I don't.

What about this part?



(b)(2) Emergency conditions. In case of any emergency, a driver may
complete his/her run without being in violation of the provisions of the
regulations in this part, if such run reasonably could have been
completed absent the emergency.


How am I selective reading that?


amy

PS. I really am NOT trying to be difficult. :)
Ye Olde Dave
2004-02-07 21:56:03 UTC
Permalink
Subject: Re: I-285 in Atlanta PLEASE ANSWER THE QUESTION Brian
First of all, TIME MANAGEMENT!
.
<.......but traffic foul-ups are a
way
of life for truck drivers (to be VERY CLEAR traffic jams DO NOT COUNT as
emergency conditions) ....I'd thought you'd have figured that out for
yourself....
While you're right about that, I've yet to head into a jamup that was
scheduled and known to me (other than some of the usual construction related
ones). Perhaps he's thinking of a jam that's actually the result of a
weather-related deal, like a wreck due to an icy road which blocks traffic &
takes several hours to get out of.
Realistically many urban jamups require you to get away from and out of the
area regardless of your logbook situation due to parking bans in the area for
trucks, posting of lots banning trucks etc. Of course, if ya head into town at
5:00 in the afternoon and don't get stuck, it's considered a minor miracle
anyway. Don't even go there at that time, park it & let the 4 wheelers fight
their turf fights, then cruise thru after the wrecks have been yanked away.
BTW Senor Bullis is right about no trucks thru Atlanta, save for having a
delivery or pickup there inside the loop. (Choke, choke)


You're never gonna believe this sir but...
When you ship it late
It'll still be late when I get it there...
Brian Smith
2004-02-06 14:03:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.
First off, I'm not avoiding the question. The only question, I responded to
was, your question when you asked, and I quote 'John, how perfect does a log
book have to be to make you happy?' end quote. My answer was, quoted again,
'A log book has to be filled out correctly, or it could make you very
unhappy.', let me ask you again, what part of completing your logbook
accurately has you confused?
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
I'll answer your question for you. If I get stuck in traffic at the 11 hour
mark, I just keep going, because I'm allowed to drive 13 hours a day in
conjunction with the 2 hours on duty-not driving, for a total of 15 hours in
a day.

Does that help you?
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
2004-02-06 14:15:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.
First off, I'm not avoiding the question. The only question, I responded to
was, your question when you asked, and I quote 'John, how perfect does a log
book have to be to make you happy?' end quote. My answer was, quoted again,
'A log book has to be filled out correctly, or it could make you very
unhappy.', let me ask you again, what part of completing your logbook
accurately has you confused?
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
I'll answer your question for you. If I get stuck in traffic at the 11 hour
mark, I just keep going, because I'm allowed to drive 13 hours a day in
conjunction with the 2 hours on duty-not driving, for a total of 15 hours in
a day.
Does that help you?
--
Brian
I thought you would avoid it a third time and I was right. I am not even
going to try for four.
Brian Smith
2004-02-06 14:24:15 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
I thought you would avoid it a third time and I was right. I am not even
going to try for four.
You obviously need to take a reading course. Do you need someone to read the
answer to you?
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
2004-02-06 15:13:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
I thought you would avoid it a third time and I was right. I am not even
going to try for four.
You obviously need to take a reading course. Do you need someone to read the
answer to you?
You removed your answer so I had to go back and get it.

You said:
I just keep going, because I'm allowed to drive 13 hours a day

In case you are as brainless as a Service Manager I know, that does not mean
a thing to me since I have to stop at 11 hours driving.

And people call Richard StOOpid? Or are you just trying to be the third
person in my killfile?
realitytrucker
2004-02-06 23:11:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
in
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
If you or John can not think of a better answer, then I suggest you not
poke
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
fun at the only answer I was given.
If, you're saying that the only answer you were given was from Richard,
then
Post by Brian Smith
what exactly are you learning from participating in this group? You've
been
Post by Brian Smith
here for awhile now, and you haven't noticed all of the people that have
and
Post by Brian Smith
are continually posting correct responses to Richard's posts? Why do you
think that is?
--
Brian
Why do you keep avoiding this particular quesion. It can not be that hard
to answer. Let me ask it again since you missed it the first two times.
If you get stuck in traffic and you run over your 11 hours driving, or 14
hours on duty, what are you supposed to do?
I would assume that you continue to drive until you can find a place
to safely park your truck then take your break. At least thats the
way it was under the old rules. I don't know if its any different
now.
Ryan Lankford
2004-02-07 01:04:53 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 17:51:48 -0600, "Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days"
Post by Brian Smith
in
Post by Brian Smith
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
Next time, just give me a URL. Besides, I asked John how perfect it has
to
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
be.
What exactly is your problem? You asked a question. I gave you a
reasonable,
Post by Brian Smith
common sense answer. Not everything in this world (common sense) has a web
site.
Start over. I was talking about getting stuck in a major traffic jam with
hardly any driving time left.
Richard says how he would have handled it and John then accuses him of
falsifying his log.
So, I take it that both you and John support that the only thing I could do
was take a 10 hour break right on the expressway?
If you or John can not think of a better answer, then I suggest you not poke
fun at the only answer I was given.
But the answer given was illegal. Call the DOT, and run RIchard's
answer by them, since you seem to think that your idol is right on the
money.


--
Ryan Lankford

"Donkeys can talk, people can fly, and a man named Jesus lives in the Sky!"

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1047091/posts
John Morgan
2004-02-06 09:29:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 64 days
Post by John Morgan
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
John, how perfect does a log book have to be to make you happy?
Very simple, log what you do, when you do it. I don't remember if you've
ever said you drove through Chicago during rush hour, but it doesn't take
long to realize that there are times to drive through, and times to sit it
out in one of the truck stops near Gary, or the several oasis sites (if you
can get in).

The major point of my post was that once again, Bullis is suggesting that
you just "make up" enough time to account for being stuck in traffic. It
fits right up there with his suggestions that if DOT puts you OOS at a scale
house, and you don't agree with the officer's decision, sue them for
felonious restraint (remember, you're not out of service, your truck is) or
just leave. Then, "if" they come after you, for driving while being put OOS,
then sue them for stopping you. And I think he was serious!

These are the types of posts he makes that get people in trouble if they
listen to him. His problem with authority, noted by constant reference to
"if a cop gives you a ticket, he must be having a bad day or short on his
numbers," shows up in many of his posts. He has opinions on lots and lots of
topics, and that's fine. But opinions do not always relate to fact.

So, how perfect must your log be? Log what you do, when you do it. Don't
try to "guess" when you would have been somewhere, or figure that you "could
have made it here or there" by a certain time. That will come back to haunt
you.

Check the regs for emergency exemptions for extending your drive time, but
remember that poor planning, like trying to do the 80 / 294 loop at 4PM,
does not constitute an emergency; it constitutes poor planning. You've been
doing this for 4 months now; you should know how to plan yourself around
cities so you don't end up in the middle of rush hour. If you haven't been
through a city at rush hour yet, talk to people at a truck stop, and don't
be afraid to tell them you're new. Everyone had only 4 months under their
belt at one time; however for most on this group is was in a prior century.

Whatever you do, be safe. I don't know where you're off to next, but I'd bet
the weather isn't going to be nice. Unless, that is, you're off to Florida
again. If you are, I don't want to hear it.

John
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
2004-02-06 13:33:12 UTC
Permalink
"John Morgan" <***@swbell.net> wrote in message
@newssvr24.news.prodigy.com...
Post by John Morgan
Check the regs for emergency exemptions for extending your drive time, but
remember that poor planning, like trying to do the 80 / 294 loop at 4PM,
does not constitute an emergency; it constitutes poor planning.
John
Why even bring up the "poor planning?" This is not an issue of poor
planning. In other words, OBJECTION Irrelevant.

There was clearly a line of cars going west on I285 in Atlanta, that,
because of a major accident, could have held me up for hours. Even going
east I had to pull in about 40 miles earlier than I wanted to.

You answer is just telling me to look elsewhere, so do you even know the
answer yourself?

Ricky
John Morgan
2004-02-06 22:02:54 UTC
Permalink
<snip>
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why even bring up the "poor planning?" This is not an issue of poor
planning. In other words, OBJECTION Irrelevant.
So what time of day did you hit the Atlanta area? Traffic is always busy
there, but there are times you want to avoid.

The reference to planning dealt more with your mentor, Bullis. Remember, it
was his post about being stuck in Chicago traffic that dealt with him saying
he just modified his log to allow him more driving time. He falsified his
log. Get it? He's done it before, got caught, and paid for it. You can't be
cited for a log violation if your logs are accurate and legal. In other
words, and I'm sure you've never heard this before, log what you do when you
do it. The DOT types on this board will agree that that sentence basically
says it all.

If you're such a fan of his logging techniques, go ahead and use them, but
they will come back to haunt you. Otherwise, plan you route so you don't
hit the larger cities during their rush-hours. I've had to delay departure
many times because I knew there was no sense in pulling out of a yard just
to go 2 miles to sit in traffic. I can snooze until traffic is gone.

Objection over-ruled.
Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
2004-02-06 22:19:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 63 days
Why even bring up the "poor planning?" This is not an issue of poor
planning. In other words, OBJECTION Irrelevant.
So what time of day did you hit the Atlanta area? Traffic is always busy
there, but there are times you want to avoid.
The reference to planning dealt more with your mentor, Bullis. Remember, it
was his post about being stuck in Chicago traffic that dealt with him saying
he just modified his log to allow him more driving time. He falsified his
log. Get it? He's done it before, got caught, and paid for it. You can't be
cited for a log violation if your logs are accurate and legal. In other
words, and I'm sure you've never heard this before, log what you do when you
do it. The DOT types on this board will agree that that sentence basically
says it all.
If you're such a fan of his logging techniques, go ahead and use them, but
they will come back to haunt you. Otherwise, plan you route so you don't
hit the larger cities during their rush-hours. I've had to delay departure
many times because I knew there was no sense in pulling out of a yard just
to go 2 miles to sit in traffic. I can snooze until traffic is gone.
Objection over-ruled.
Since you still don't get it, let me ask it the way Amy did.

"So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months ago
for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would that be
logged?"
John Morgan
2004-02-09 17:58:10 UTC
Permalink
"Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days" <***@sorry.org> wrote in
message news:c013v6$***@library2.airnews.net...
<snip>
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
Since you still don't get it, let me ask it the way Amy did.
"So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months ago
for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would that be
logged?"
What ammonia leak? Still haven't found anything on it, but Amy promises to
find it.
Since you still don't get it, Richard, open you book to Part 395.1,(b) in
which you are told that in event of adverse driving conditions, you are
allowed to drive an additional 2 hours to get to a place of safety for the
occupants of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial
motor vehicle and its cargo. Adverse driving conditions include "snow,
sleet, fog, other adverse weather conditions, a highway covered with snow or
ice, or (PAY ATTENTION) unusual road and traffic conditions, none of which
were apparent on the basis of information known to the person dispatching
the run at the time it was begun. So, you only get an additional 2 hours to
complete your run, and this is dependent on you being totally and completely
surprised by the event. You are to avoid it if possible, but "Rookies" can
be easily surprised. You did the correct thing in Atlanta. You heard about
the highway closing, and looked for an alternate route. When you found the
alternate route was going to put you over hours, you shut down an hour
early, I believe you said. See! You were not surprised by the incident -
you heard of it, and took action. You lost an hour driving time, but had
you continued, I doubt that you would be covered by either of the two
sections that deal with this type of incident.

And with no choice but to allow yourself only 2 additional hours, we now
find another rule that seems, not quite to contradict part (b) as noted
above, but kinda' sorta' does, in a round-a-bout way. (You'd swear attorneys
drew up these rules.)

Now, continue to Part 395.1, (b), (2) and deal with Emergency conditions, in
which you can "complete his/her run without being in violation of the
provisions of the regulations in this part, IF such run reasonably could
have been completed absent the emergency." Now, we go to the definitions,
and of course, "emergency" is not listed. Must have been lawyers. However,
since the local authorities have apparently declared an emergency, there you
go.

Try this:
Sit in your cab, and note the time you came to a complete stop with no
further movement because of this "emergency." Mark this on "Driving" with a
description of date and time, to the minute, your location on which highway
and exactly where you were on the highway, and a description of why you're
sitting on the highway instead of moving, the actual event. If, while you
sit there, you run out of time, you continue your line in driving. When you
finally move, you find the immediately closest "safe haven" and you put
yourself out of service until you have completed a complete rest cycle.

Got it Richard? Several of us tried to get you to do some research, but you
were more interested in your attitude coming through, and having others do
your work for you. You obviously know more than the law-enforcement types
here, and would rather listen to the self proclaimed "King of Bull-Shit's"
ideas on how to prepare your logs than actually trying to find out how to do
it correctly.

See you on the streets.
Amy D
2004-02-09 19:08:40 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
Since you still don't get it, let me ask it the way Amy did.
"So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago
Post by Ricky Rookie with 6m in 62 days
for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would that be
logged?"
What ammonia leak? Still haven't found anything on it, but Amy promises to
find it.
This ammonia leak -- I was hoping to find the article our local paper
did on the stranded motorists but can't find it archived anywhere:

http://www.cnn.com/2003/TRAVEL/02/23/ammonia.tourist.evacuation.ap/

No, I don't know WHY they didn't back all the traffic off bridges,
etc....guess they aren't as efficient as truckinsp......maybe it's just
because they didn't have enough manpower to back up traffic, evacuate
motels, and monitor/control/cleanup the leak. Personally, I find the
idea of backing a bunch of traffic off bridges or even roads a recipe
for disaster as long as there is not immediate threat of explosion or
something and have never personally seen traffic backed up out of a jam.

amy
Post by John Morgan
Since you still don't get it, Richard, open you book to Part 395.1,(b) in
which you are told that in event of adverse driving conditions, you are
allowed to drive an additional 2 hours to get to a place of safety for the
occupants of the commercial motor vehicle and security for the commercial
motor vehicle and its cargo. Adverse driving conditions include "snow,
sleet, fog, other adverse weather conditions, a highway covered with snow or
ice, or (PAY ATTENTION) unusual road and traffic conditions, none of which
were apparent on the basis of information known to the person dispatching
the run at the time it was begun. So, you only get an additional 2 hours to
complete your run, and this is dependent on you being totally and completely
surprised by the event. You are to avoid it if possible, but "Rookies" can
be easily surprised. You did the correct thing in Atlanta. You heard about
the highway closing, and looked for an alternate route. When you found the
alternate route was going to put you over hours, you shut down an hour
early, I believe you said. See! You were not surprised by the incident -
you heard of it, and took action. You lost an hour driving time, but had
you continued, I doubt that you would be covered by either of the two
sections that deal with this type of incident.
And with no choice but to allow yourself only 2 additional hours, we now
find another rule that seems, not quite to contradict part (b) as noted
above, but kinda' sorta' does, in a round-a-bout way. (You'd swear attorneys
drew up these rules.)
Now, continue to Part 395.1, (b), (2) and deal with Emergency conditions, in
which you can "complete his/her run without being in violation of the
provisions of the regulations in this part, IF such run reasonably could
have been completed absent the emergency." Now, we go to the definitions,
and of course, "emergency" is not listed. Must have been lawyers. However,
since the local authorities have apparently declared an emergency, there you
go.
Sit in your cab, and note the time you came to a complete stop with no
further movement because of this "emergency." Mark this on "Driving" with a
description of date and time, to the minute, your location on which highway
and exactly where you were on the highway, and a description of why you're
sitting on the highway instead of moving, the actual event. If, while you
sit there, you run out of time, you continue your line in driving. When you
finally move, you find the immediately closest "safe haven" and you put
yourself out of service until you have completed a complete rest cycle.
Got it Richard? Several of us tried to get you to do some research, but you
were more interested in your attitude coming through, and having others do
your work for you. You obviously know more than the law-enforcement types
here, and would rather listen to the self proclaimed "King of Bull-Shit's"
ideas on how to prepare your logs than actually trying to find out how to do
it correctly.
See you on the streets.
Dan M
2004-02-09 19:14:37 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
No, I don't know WHY they didn't back all the traffic off bridges,
etc....guess they aren't as efficient as truckinsp......maybe it's just
because they didn't have enough manpower to back up traffic, evacuate
motels, and monitor/control/cleanup the leak. Personally, I find the
idea of backing a bunch of traffic off bridges or even roads a recipe
for disaster as long as there is not immediate threat of explosion or
something and have never personally seen traffic backed up out of a jam.
I've seen it a couple of times over the couple of decades in the LA area.
Brian Smith
2004-02-09 22:17:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Personally, I find the
idea of backing a bunch of traffic off bridges or even roads a recipe
for disaster as long as there is not immediate threat of explosion or
something and have never personally seen traffic backed up out of a jam.
FWIW, the authorities up here will back traffic up, from an accident or
incident scene, to get it moving again.
--
Brian
www.accesswave.ca/~orion
Truckinsp
2004-02-09 22:28:14 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
This ammonia leak -- I was hoping to find the article our local paper
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TRAVEL/02/23/ammonia.tourist.evacuation.ap/
That CAN'T be the story you were referring to Amy, because, if you read it, you
would know everyone was EVACUATED....they didn't leave them stuck in traffic
for 8 hrs....try again.....
Amy D
2004-02-09 23:43:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
This ammonia leak -- I was hoping to find the article our local paper
http://www.cnn.com/2003/TRAVEL/02/23/ammonia.tourist.evacuation.ap/
That CAN'T be the story you were referring to Amy, because, if you read it, you
would know everyone was EVACUATED....they didn't leave them stuck in traffic
for 8 hrs....try again.....
They did NOT evacuate the people in cars, truckinsp. I live here, I KNOW
what happened. They made them sit there with windows up and no AC.
Don't know how I can get you that info since our local news didn't
archive it. I'll check the news stations but it won't be today. Could
see if the editor can email me a copy -- could go find it on microfiche
but can't get it to you that way. Believe what you want.

amy
Truckinsp
2004-02-10 00:15:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
They did NOT evacuate the people in cars, truckinsp. I live here, I KNOW
what happened. They made them sit there with windows up and no AC.
Don't know how I can get you that info since our local news didn't
archive it. I'll check the news stations but it won't be today. Could
see if the editor can email me a copy -- could go find it on microfiche
but can't get it to you that way. Believe what you want.
amy
BS amy, ....they evacuate from the crash outward....they don't leave people
sitting at the crash scene in a case like this.....if it was so bad that they
evacuated hotels, don't you think they would have evacuated the people CLOSEST
first?????? So any trucker who told me he was stuck at this scene for eight
hours would be so full of bullshit, I'd have a hard time believing ANYTHING he
said...
Amy D
2004-02-10 00:47:49 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
Post by Amy D
They did NOT evacuate the people in cars, truckinsp. I live here, I KNOW
what happened. They made them sit there with windows up and no AC.
Don't know how I can get you that info since our local news didn't
archive it. I'll check the news stations but it won't be today. Could
see if the editor can email me a copy -- could go find it on microfiche
but can't get it to you that way. Believe what you want.
amy
BS amy, ....they evacuate from the crash outward....they don't leave people
sitting at the crash scene in a case like this.....if it was so bad that they
evacuated hotels, don't you think they would have evacuated the people CLOSEST
first?????? So any trucker who told me he was stuck at this scene for eight
hours would be so full of bullshit, I'd have a hard time believing ANYTHING he
said...
Ok, truckinsp. It was not a CRASH. They evacuated TOURISTS. So, what
kind of proof would I need to get you to believe this. If I get MSDOT
to verify this and forward the actual email to you will you believe me?

amy
Ricky with 6m in 60 days
2004-02-10 01:36:07 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Ok, truckinsp. It was not a CRASH. They evacuated TOURISTS. So, what
kind of proof would I need to get you to believe this. If I get MSDOT
to verify this and forward the actual email to you will you believe me?
amy
truck does not want to believe that someone would be forced to take over two
hours at a particular traffic scene. It does not fit in *his* rule book.

It looks like he is stooping to name calling, when he called someone a
"hypocrite" and used the term "hypothetical situation" to discredit a story.
Watch out for those people, they fight dirty.

One of the places that was willing to hire me before I started work where I
am now, has an add in the paper again. I felt like taking my truck down
there to show them, I could "Backup and hit the dock." FYI, that is what
they wanted me to do the first time I went down there.
Truckinsp
2004-02-10 06:08:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by Amy D
Ok, truckinsp. It was not a CRASH. They evacuated TOURISTS. So, what
kind of proof would I need to get you to believe this. If I get MSDOT
to verify this and forward the actual email to you will you believe me?
amy
Lets get back to your original question..... from your 2/6/04 post....
"So what about the traffic that was stopped in Mississippi a few months
ago for EIGHT HOURS because of an anhydrous ammonia leak? How would
that be logged?

amy"

If they were evacuating....traffic was not "stopped", it was being rerouted
away from the area.....so no trucks were "stopped" for 8 hours.....any trucks
that had to unload in that area surely had a "safe haven" to park in until they
were allowed into the area....

You just can't get it into your head that emergency personnel try to remove all
people from the area of danger...they don't just "let them sit there" because
they are truck drivers....

Don't twist your story for sake of argument....
Ricky with 6m in 58 days
2004-02-10 23:07:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by Truckinsp
You just can't get it into your head that emergency personnel try to remove all
people from the area of danger...they don't just "let them sit there" because
they are truck drivers....
Don't twist your story for sake of argument....
Did I call it or what when I said:
"truck does not want to believe that someone would be forced to take over
two hours at a particular traffic scene. It does not fit in *his* rule
book."

I think I can read him like a book now.
John Morgan
2004-02-10 14:23:57 UTC
Permalink
"Amy D" <***@joimail.com> wrote in message news:***@joimail.com...
<snip>
I thought this was something that just happened; the link you post is almost
a year old.

It does mention evacuating a lot of hotels along the coast, shutting down
the airport, and closing a 10 miles stretch of I-10 and 3 of US-49, so,
absent any information from the article, it appears the leak was somewhere
near the intersection of those highways.

I'd have exited at either exit 31 or 38 if possible. The idea that hotels
were evacuated, yet drivers were left in their cars sounds dangerous to me.
Besides, the news article specifically states that "Tourists were told to
head north; there was no immediate word how many returned after the
evacuation was lifted." If tourists were told to head north, they did so in
cars. US-49 is a designated truck route. If tourists can head north, so can
the trucks. If they could not get to it because of the closures on the
I-10, then exits 31 for EB and 38 for WB drivers would be ideal to get the
trucks going the opposite directions. If the traffic was blocked beyond
those two, the next exits are only 3 miles east at 41MM and 3 miles west oat
28MM.

I don't dispute that there was a huge traffic mess for 7 hours, but it
appears the emergency services personnel had a handle on it, and were moving
people, as your link indicates.

Where exactly was the leak? None of the area there looks inviting for that
type of incident.
John Morgan
2004-02-10 14:41:11 UTC
Permalink
"John Morgan" <***@swbell.net> wrote in message news:1Q5Wb.2262$***@newssvr23.news.prodigy.com...
<I hate snipping my own stuff for room>
Post by John Morgan
It does mention evacuating a lot of hotels along the coast, shutting down
the airport, and closing a 10 miles stretch of I-10 and 3 of US-49, so,
absent any information from the article, it appears the leak was somewhere
near the intersection of those highways.
I just re-read Amy's post and found something so glaring I can't believe I
missed it:

This thing happened at 2:30 AM of a Sunday morning. So just how much traffic
is there at that time of night. It was over by 9:30 AM. Most people who
were not awakened by the Emergency Services Personnel to move out were not
even awake by the time it was over. I know I wouldn't be.

Had this occurred on a week-day, during morning or afternoon rush, I can see
a problem. By 2:30AM, the bars are probably closed, so the Air Force and
Navy personnel are back in their barracks, traffic is probably non-existent.
Someone stuck 8 hours for something that happened during those times would
be hard pressed to justify not finding a way out of this.
Amy D
2004-02-17 14:55:15 UTC
Permalink
I agree it was very lucky it happened when it did -- traffic was fairly
light and honestly I don't know how many trucks were involved -- our
local article focused on stopped 4-wheelers. Hopefully, any trucks
would have plenty of warning previous via CB <or redirected by LEO's> to
go around it or stop at a truckstop. But I can't imagine a truck or two
not being in the mix in a 10 mile stretch of I-10 when they were forced
to stop. You DO have to remember that Biloxi rocks all night long with
casinos so there ARE plenty of people out and about but it was very
fortunate that it happened the time it did. In my guess, traffic being
light prompted them to instruct them to stay there and how to stay
safe while worrying about the unpredictable tourists, late-night walmart
shoppers who are out roaming around all hours of night breathing the air.

amy
Post by John Morgan
<I hate snipping my own stuff for room>
Post by John Morgan
It does mention evacuating a lot of hotels along the coast, shutting down
the airport, and closing a 10 miles stretch of I-10 and 3 of US-49, so,
absent any information from the article, it appears the leak was somewhere
near the intersection of those highways.
I just re-read Amy's post and found something so glaring I can't believe I
This thing happened at 2:30 AM of a Sunday morning. So just how much traffic
is there at that time of night. It was over by 9:30 AM. Most people who
were not awakened by the Emergency Services Personnel to move out were not
even awake by the time it was over. I know I wouldn't be.
Had this occurred on a week-day, during morning or afternoon rush, I can see
a problem. By 2:30AM, the bars are probably closed, so the Air Force and
Navy personnel are back in their barracks, traffic is probably non-existent.
Someone stuck 8 hours for something that happened during those times would
be hard pressed to justify not finding a way out of this.
Alexander Cain
2004-02-05 15:42:00 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Richard
When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it, I
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
Of course he is. St00pid doesn't give a shit about the law. Nor does he
care about proper driving techniques. He's a menace and is blacklisted in
every major trucking company in his region as a result.
Ryan Lankford
2004-02-05 17:32:51 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:11:52 GMT, "John Morgan"
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Richard
When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it, I
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
He's even been cited for HOS violations in Wisconsin.

http://tinyurl.com/2zy9m


--
Ryan Lankford

"Donkeys can talk, people can fly, and a man named Jesus lives in the Sky!"

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1047091/posts
Alexander Cain
2004-02-05 18:04:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Ryan Lankford
On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:11:52 GMT, "John Morgan"
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Richard
When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it, I
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
He's even been cited for HOS violations in Wisconsin.
http://tinyurl.com/2zy9m
whoa. Good job! Now watch Bullis come bleating on how that's false and the
court records are all wrong.
Ryan Lankford
2004-02-05 18:53:42 UTC
Permalink
On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 13:04:25 -0500, "Alexander Cain"
Post by Alexander Cain
Post by Ryan Lankford
On Thu, 05 Feb 2004 14:11:52 GMT, "John Morgan"
Post by John Morgan
<snip>
Post by Richard
When ever I hit Chicago during rush hour traffic and have to drive it,
I
Post by Ryan Lankford
Post by John Morgan
Post by Richard
show 2 hours off duty or sleeper berth somewhere handy.
Never been questioned on it yet.
So you admit, again, that you falsify your logs?
He's even been cited for HOS violations in Wisconsin.
http://tinyurl.com/2zy9m
whoa. Good job! Now watch Bullis come bleating on how that's false and the
court records are all wrong.
Nah, he's owned up to it before.


--
Ryan Lankford

"Donkeys can talk, people can fly, and a man named Jesus lives in the Sky!"

http://209.157.64.200/focus/f-news/1047091/posts
Richard
2004-02-05 06:38:23 UTC
Permalink
From: "Alexander Cain"
You are, of course, wrong again.
Atlanta is considering placing a limit on the speed trucks can go in
certain areas. There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.
Sorry Alex, but the truck ban has been in effect in atlanta ever since I
started in 1990.

Note: Atlanta area--Interstate highways within the I-285 beltway are not
available to through trucks with more than 6 wheels because of construction.

from: http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/legsregs/directives/fapg/cfr06581.htm

Scroll to the bottom of the Georgia section.
Alexander Cain
2004-02-05 07:53:49 UTC
Permalink
From: "Alexander Cain"
You are, of course, wrong again.
Atlanta is considering placing a limit on the speed trucks can go in
certain areas. There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.
Sor[SLAP!]
St00pid, I have SloRetard killfiled and I certainly am not interested in
anything you could possibly repost.
David Stites
2004-02-05 16:22:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alexander Cain
Post by Richard
Post by me-not-you
They want the products, but they just don't want to have to deal with
those big slow trucks on their highways !
So? Atlanta Georgia already has a ban in effect.
Unless you have business within the city limits you do not go through town
on I-75.
You are, of course, wrong again.
Atlanta is considering placing a limit on the speed trucks can go in certain
areas.
There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.
You're a damn idiot, Bullis. Trucks make up a good percentage of vehicles
on Atlanta interstate property.
No through trucks on I-75 in Atlanta, and Cincinnati, and I believe I-25
in Albuquerque.
--
David Stites
Mount Vernon, WA
david at dstites dot net
not me <>
2004-02-07 14:21:40 UTC
Permalink
On Wed, 4 Feb 2004 14:16:46 -0500, "Alexander Cain"
Post by Alexander Cain
There is no ban on trucks on I-75...much less in Atlanta.
There damn sure IS a ban on *through* trucks anywhere on the
Interstates within I-285.


x-- 100 Proof News - http://www.100ProofNews.com
x-- 3,500+ Binary NewsGroups, and over 90,000 other groups
x-- Access to over 800 Gigs/Day - $8.95/Month
x-- UNLIMITED DOWNLOAD
me-not-you
2004-02-05 23:12:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by Richard
So? Atlanta Georgia already has a ban in effect.
Essentially, what you're saying ... "so" ...you're saying it's okay? It's
okay just because one... two... three cities says "no trucks", it's okay for
all cities to say okay?

Hey Bullis, when are you ever going to pull that over inflated fat head of
yours out of that cavernous like ass of yours & get a clue?
Post by Richard
Unless you have business within the city limits you do not go through town
on I-75.
Any driver who's had time on the road realizes that some cities ban trucks.
As usual, you've added absolutely nothing to the thread, except to prove
what a useless waste of oxygen your being is !
Post by Richard
Kentucky has banned trucks from "the hill" on I-75 leading into cincinnati a
couple of times.
Huh? A couple times? Banned trucks from the hill? Maybe the left lane,
STUPID !

Why not mention the time trucks were banned completely from going through
Cincinnati on 71 & 75 during road construction.......... hell, let's throw
in the time they were banned from going through Columbus last year also,
it's in the same state you know !!
Post by Richard
Most major cities ban through hazmat shipments if they have a bypass
available.
What the heck does this have to do with the ban on all trucks on I-95 in
Richmond?
Post by Richard
I would have no squabbles with richmond if they implemented the ban.
295 runs parallel to 95 so it only adds a few miles.
You probably wouldn't have any squabbles.... since you're in the "looking
for work" status.
Post by Richard
So what?
Every come out of Petersburg & have to go West on I-64, STUPID?
Post by Richard
Quite frankly, richmond is a PITA to drive through anyway.
"Quite frankly"........... NOTHING has proved to be more of a PITA then your
existence & all the bad information you try to pawn off !


me-not-you
Joyce
2004-02-06 15:19:12 UTC
Permalink
Yup,,,,,,Virginia is at it again.

the newspaper Virginian Pilot had an article in it yesterday about the
residents
wanting the truckers to be banned from
THEIR INTERSTATES...that they pay for
in taxes........

Well I got a little mad at this Mr.Frank
Ferguson's letter to the editor, about the
truckers should be banned during the
early morning and evening rush...because
it makes the traffic come to a stand still.

But, he doesn't mention that along with his taxes paying for his
interstate, truckers
pay much more...to build those interstates
and tunnels, and bridges...and if truckers
had to do what he recommends, and that
is,,,,do run during the night, and early
afternoon,,,he is sure that the ports and
rail will adapt to the change...HA HA
is he crazy......they don't adapt to anyone.
because it's money, if the containers aren't picked up withint an amount
of time
storage fees are charged,,,and the rail,
and ports get the storage money.....


So, I took keyboard in hand and wrote a
letter to the editor and advised Mr. Ferguson that the trucker pays a
hell of
a lot more then the few dollars he did...

Perhaps he didn't know what Truckers have pay for the privilege of
delivering
the products Mr. Ferguson takes for granted......

When the residents (taxpayers) of the area were asked if they would pay
more in
taxes to build additional roads, and tunnels
they all said 'NO'
However the communities involved are building more and more and without
regard to the traffic it involves. as there
are no trains, buses and subways to
help the traffic along......

Mr. Ferguson if the trucker's were banned
would if he bought something and was
waiting for a delivery.....would be still
waiting until it got there by itself....

When they voted "NO",,, where did they
think the money would come from The
Sky.....did they care that truckers' pay
fuel tax too. and highway use tax 4 quarters a year, state tax, as
well...
and probably more then they do as a
resident.....

Norfolk, and Virginia Beach have built
so much in the past few years, they have
created a serious problem in the traffic
due to the lack of public transportation,
it's pathetic.....everyone trying to merge
in three different places to one road to
the tunnels, and interstates....it's not
even safe, as emergency vehicles cannot
get thru, a barge hits the Jordan Bridge,
and knocks it out of service, the floodgates to a tunnel doesn't work
and the tunnel is flooded out,,,causing many
problems in that area....

So, now that these very same people
said NO,,,to more taxes,,,what else
can they expect.....

Oh yes, he said the trucks are cumbesome, and slow.
Well there is a limit of speed posted,
perhaps he is suggesting they should
go beyond the speed limit....
So, trucker's are to adapt to a new time
limit, to enable the workers to get to work
quicker........Ha.....

Joyce
Loading...