DND International, the carrier that had its operating authority revoked after the FMCSA found a “dangerous pattern of serious falsification” in the company log books during an investigation has been cleared to resume operation by Administrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. The investigation was prompted by a fatal accident caused by a DND driver who was grossly over hours that claimed the life of a Tollway worker and seriously injured a State Trooper.
This is the same incident that prompted a senator to call for a review of FMCSA safety practices to find out why the company hadn’t been shut down earlier, and yet according to Judge Goodwin, there was insufficient evidence to support the claim that DND was an imminent threat to public safety.
Judge Goodwin also claimed that there was no evidence that the company’s safety practices caused “any fatigue, recklessness, dangerous driving [or] negligent driving.” This claim was made despite the fact that the FMCSA inspected seven drivers’ logbooks and found that every single one of them had been falsified HOS log violations. Not to mention the fact that the driver who caused the accident had been on duty for 36 hours with only a 3.5 hour break. Update: the attorney for DND claims that the original reporting was incorrect. While the driver was in violation of HOS at the time of the accident, it wasn’t as extreme as had been reported. This is also leaving aside the fact that he managed to run in to a patrol vehicle and highway maintenance vehicle – both of which had flashing lights – without even attempting to apply the brakes.
Despite the carrier exceeding the threshold for federal intervention in both the HOS compliance and unsafe driving categories, David LaPorte, a lawyer for the company, claimed that DND had “a safety record to be proud of.”
Judge Goodwin wrote that the out of service order “amounted to the ‘death penalty’ for DND,” which is both a very poor and extremely fitting choice of words given their safety record. The only good news here is that DND reports that it lost all of its drivers after the shutdown order and will need time before it can get trucks back on the road.
Update: David LaPorte, lawyer for DND, disputes the accuracy of the articles used as source material for this post. I think much of his defense here comes down to arguing over semantics and using cherry-picked testimony, but readers can view his comment here.
Next Story: C.R. England Accident Kills 1 Trainee, Injures 15 More
Source: overdrive, chicagotribune, truckinginfo
Horrible display of reporting. Report the WHOLE truth, not a good gotcha article. The “seven” drivers were O/Os who couldn’t produce sufficient information to the liking of the DOT’s satisfaction. Not to mention that 7 drivers is out of 150 O/O’s leased onto DND. Company trucks and drivers had good records. 36 hour trip, not driving straight. I could continue with the discrepancies, how would have to rewrite every single paragraph.
I’m not sure where you’re getting your information, but the public data available on DND International shows an incredibly high number of HOS violations: http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/carrier.aspx?enc=EktmQB7cjhRTipgVfwSeyA==
Feel free to rewrite my blog post, make sure to include links to the articles that you used as sources.
Ya just gotta love the wisdome of Judges ….And their logic…
“Protect the people!”
If ya want to protect the people, have stricter requirements to acquire and maintain a drivers license for all vehicles.
With all the FMCSA inspections and log book checking on these trucking companies..
What is the procedure for the inspection.? Turn the log book pages or compare toll tickets or fuel tickets with them . ??? It seems that is the BIG issue. Nothing about out of adj brakes or cracked windshields or even a non existent med card.
What is the criteria and training for these inspectors? Is it like some carriers. Speak half way good english, keep your shirt tucked in and carry credentials?
Just wonder how they do it.
EOBRs will not stop this practice. It will not make our highways safer.It will not prevent accidents. It will control and intimidate drivers to distraction.
http://m.fleetowner.com/fleet-management/dot-judge-reverses-fmcsa-s-shutdown-dnd-international
Mike,
I see you are trying to justify your information from a blog article obviously sided with the owner operator crowd. This is by no means data one would use to justify the validity of this companies safety outlook either pro or con.
If you really want to see the history of this company use the data collected during roadside inpsection and audits, or you can clearly see a very long history of being outragiously OVER the threshold limits in both “driver controllable” basics here:
http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/History.aspx?enc=EktmQB7cjhRTipgVfwSeyA==
Pick any of the roadside inspections and note the violations listed. This company is in FACT a danger to the motoring public, and I can’t see any data that would support your argument.
Here are but a few of the noted violations. How many of them would you deem to be safe?
392.2C Failure to obey traffic control device
392.2FC Following too close
392.2LC Improper lane change
392.2-SLLS4 State/Local Laws – Speeding 15 or more miles per hour over the speed limit
392.2-SLLS3 State/Local Laws – Speeding 11-14 miles per hour over the speed limit
392.2T Improper turns
392.82A1 Using a hand-held mobile telephone while operating a CMV
392.16 Failing to use seat belt while operating CMV
395.13(d) Driving after being declared out-of-service
395.3(a)(1) Requiring or permitting driver to drive more than 11 hours
395.3(a)(2) Requiring or permitting driver to drive after 14 hours on duty
395.8(e) False report of driver’s record of duty status
395.3A3-PROP Driving beyond 11 hour driving limit in a 14 hour period
392.16 Failing to use seat belt while operating CMV
This is barely scratching the surface on what this company was cited for. This also encompasses 27 drivers out of the 49 currently submitted on their MCS-150. That figure equates to just over 55% of the drivers conducting themselves with egregious diregard for regulation or the safety of the public in mind. I don’t know about you, but that seems to me to be a justifiable reason to shut this carrier down!
What sticks out to me specifically are the NUMEROUS exceptions of speeding and talking on a hand held cell hphone! Does that sound safe to you?
Cary Davis
Director of Safety, the Albert Companies
caryd@albertmoving.com
I can’t believe that this company wasn’t shut down for good.
Killer Carrier? Is this out of a Stephen King novel? Don’t most carriers have fatal wrecks?
No, most carriers with 49 drivers don’t have fatal wrecks, and fatal wrecks are rarely caused by truck drivers. Most carriers also don’t have the terrible HOS compliance rate that this carrier has: http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/carrier.aspx?enc=EktmQB7cjhRTipgVfwSeyA==
Accidents happen that cause fatalities, and in the majority of cases they’re caused by four-wheelers. In this case, the driver is responsible for the accident, and I think the carrier deserves equal responsibility for what I think and the FMCSA thinks is a pattern of preventable safety violations.
Doesn’t matter…no insurance company will ever give them a policy if they have their authority back!
I am the attorney for DND quoted in your article. Since the tragedy on I-88, I have seen an incredible amount of inaccurate reporting and distortion of the facts and DND’s safety record, but your article takes the cake. First, the FMCSA did not find every single log they checked false. The FMCSA reviewed 210 logs for 7 drivers. Of those 210 logs, 54 were found to be false. All 7 drivers reviewed had at least 1 false log, but it is a gross misstatement to say that every log was false. Most importantly, of the 54 false logs, only 3 were found to have concealed an hours of service violation. The FMCSA found just 3 other hours of service limitation violations. So after an extensive FMCSA investigation, the FMCSA was able to prove just 6 hours of service violations out of 210 logs. That is not even a “critical” violation under the FMCSA’s safety fitness rating methodology, let alone evidence of an Imminent Hazard. As you should know, a driver’s log book may not match a supporting document for several reasons other than the driver concealing an hours of service violation. Moreover, the FMCSA investigator calculated the time it took DND drivers to travel between toll plazas to see if DND drivers were speeding. Out of 210 such calculations, the FMCSA found that in DND drivers were at or below the speed limit in 203. The worst speeder averaged just over 3 mph over the speed limit. If you know anything about trucking, you know how misleading CSA scores can be. Indeed, your article criticized DND for their CSA Scores but omits the fact that the FMCSA’s own Field Administrator admitted under oath that CSA scores are an unreliable method to assess a motor carrier’s safety fitness. For example, in the six month period between October 1, 2013 and April 1, 2014, the date the Imminent Hazard Order was served, DND’s drivers traveled approximately 2.7 millions and received just 2 speeding tickets, an improper lane change ticket, and a seat belt ticket. There is something fundamentally wrong with a system that would characterize that record over 2.7 million miles as being unsafe. Regarding DND’s hours of service roadside performance, they have had 24 relevant inspections going back to December, 2013 with only 1 citation – and that was for form and manner. Your claim about the Renato Velasquez being on duty for 36 hours is simply repeating misinformation in previous articles. The undisputed evidence at the hearing was that Velasquez picked up his load on the Friday before the accident, was off duty from 12:30pm on Friday for the rest of that day, and was off duty the entire day on Saturday. On Sunday, Velasquez was to leave for Elkhorn, NE early enough to get there, take 10 consecutive hours off-duty, deliver in Elkhorn, and then wait for instructions about a return load back to Chicago. The only reason he was over hours at the time of the accident is that he did not leave on Sunday early enough for him to take his 10 consecutive hours off duty. Both FMCSA officials testified under oath that they had no evidence DND knew Velasquez did not leave on Sunday when he should have. Furthermore, both FMCSA officials testified under oath that they had no evidence that DND ever dispatched a driver in violation of the hours of service rules, ever required a driver to violate the hours of service rules, or ever asked a driver to violate the hours of service rules. The FMCSA interviewed current and former drivers, and all agreed that DND never forced them to violate the hours or service rules and never asked them to violate the hours of service rules. Six hours of service violations out of 210 checked, 2 speeding tickets and a lane change violation in 2.7 million miles traveled, no evidence that any driver was ever dispatched in violation of the hours of service rules, no driver ever asked or required to violate the hours of service rules, and an accident rate found to be Satisfactory is a safety record to be proud of. DND is thankful it was able to bring its case before a judge with the courage to rule on the evidence and the law rather than the public hysteria reflected in your article. Thank you, David L. LaPorte, attorney for DND International, Inc.
“As you should know, a driver’s log book may not match a supporting document for several reasons other than the driver concealing an hours of service violation.”
What a marvelous excuse to conveniently discard any document coincidentally showing an out of hours violation. I wouldn’t be surprised if half of your statements in defense of your client started with “Isn’t it possible that…”
Your arguments included the extraction of numbers that surely impressed the judge and the point that infractions were minimal is well taken. But those of us in the trucking industry know that even with the establishment of reasonable doubt to whittle away inconsistencies, the reality is often quite different.
That is why the implementation of EOBRs is imminent.
David, you do a great job of making it seem like your client has been victimized by this article, but despite your impassioned arguing there isn’t much that you’re actually disputing. You’re right, the driver was violating HOS, it just wasn’t as bad as sources had originally reported. And instead of saying that all 7 of the drivers who had their logs inspected showed log falsifications, I’ll change that to log violations.
If there is an on board computer the company knows what time he left. Also,it really doesn’t matter what time he left, if his drive time is up he has to shut down for 10 hours. If he couldn’t see the flashing lights, he shouldn’t be driving. Can anyone honestly say they driven past a police car with lights flashing and didn’t see them if they were awake and not distracted? Even if he didn’t see the lights till it was too late he was following to close!!!
About time there was someone of the “educated and professional world” that actually has a clue and is willing to stand up for the drivers. I am a firm believer that numbers never lie, it is just a matter of whom is manipulating them. I also am a firm believer that the media and especially the government love to twist the numbers for ratings and to appease the pitch fork armed villager’s.
I will address one of your statements here, and I quote; “The only reason he was over hours at the time of the accident is that he did not leave on Sunday early enough for him to take his 10 consecutive hours off duty.”
Another way to say this would be that the driver failed to take the required rest break upon arriving, and prior to departing again! That is an HOS violation, that in my book, means the driver did not recieve the required amount of rest to perform his duty according to regulations!!!
Also one does not need to use the CSA score exclusively to determine this carrier is a threat to the public. Look at the specific violations listed per vehicle and you will see here were 27 vehicles listed with violations for the compiled information on the company’s SAFER SNAPSHOT.
Considering they only show 42 power units listed with the company, that is a 64% rate of vehicles being operated well outside of what is considered to be SAFE or best practises.
I also note that you on the one hand want to state that CSA data (compiled by agency officials) are, and I quote,” If you know anything about trucking, you know how misleading CSA scores can be “, yet you turn right around and use this same data in a line when it suits your needs, and again, I quote, “an accident rate found to be Satisfactory “, also compiled from the same agency officials.
I will also note that even if your data evaluating 6 drivers may show THOSE particular drivers reflect violations you consider to be of little consequence, it does not negate the OVERWHELMING data available about the carrier that show egregious violations in both driver controllable BASICS! That data can be found here:
http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/BASICs.aspx?enc=EktmQB7cjhT0Qo28B64+SA==
and here:
http://ai.fmcsa.dot.gov/SMS/Data/BASICs.aspx?enc=EktmQB7cjhSZjHqHtBXYFQ==
Just look at the three pages of egregious violations listed under both of these basics. Let me have that sink in again THREE pages of violation in EACH basic.
At the end of the day your response, to me, looks just like what it is supposed to look like coming from the lawyer of the defendant. Lawyer talk with a helping of smoke an mirrors thrown in for effect.
“My Two Cents”
It has been the obvious,. that drama sells copy, facts do not.
A reporter is under pressure to produce, very much like a driver,. yet one of these professions is over regulated by numerous agency’s, and the other has carte blanche to do as it pleases,.
I wonder how many other professions are so under the microscope?
Perhaps the reporter was working under sleep depravation, hence such an inaccurate and poor excuse for reporting the facts as noted in the court room.
Driving a truck isn’t a Constitutional right, but I get the gist of your sentiment.
There were some minor inaccuracies that have been corrected, in my opinion it mostly came down to semantics. The defense attorney argues very eloquently on behalf of his client, but make sure you read his claims with a careful eye.
Well,its a fact that this judge just allowed DND International to resume business. Its a fact that the driver for DND killed two people. That isnt inventing drama where none exists for the purpose of selling a story. Though you may have a point in what you say……..you might not want to use a story where the drivers complete incompetence (or whatever you want to call it) caused the death of two innocent people.
One death, the most recent update I read on the state trooper was that he is still hospitalized as of a week ago, not sure whether he is still in a critical care unit. But either way there is no disputing that it’s a tragedy.
Seriously? You are asking if any other proffesion is under regulatory scrutiny at this level? How about nerely ANY proffesion where the job effects the general public:
Pilots, Doctors, Petrolium companies, Chemical companies, Nuclear facilities, all Energy suppliers, construction, automotive industry, et.c et.c et.c
this list would be a mile long!
“Cherry picked testimony”, that is exactly the phrase I would use to describe what trucking companies do . They do this cherry picking so much they cant even tell anymore. I have been searching for years to describe the nonsense that spews from CEOs mouths and the safety men that serve them , and” cherry picked testimony ” is exactly it. Thank you. And” sic em” . Cherry picked cherry pickin ‘ is what this is by golly. Whew, I nearly fell in the rabbit hole that time. Good bye rabbit. I gotta “tea party “to attend and I mustnt be late.
If you think I was cherry-picking and engaging in semantics attached is a link for Judge Goodwin’s Order. Much of the testimony is quoted in the Order. You and your readers can make your own decision on whether I cherry-picked or engaged in semantics.
http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FMCSA-2014-0159-0007
Yes, please do. Though as you know, the Order isn’t a full accounting of the facts of the case, it focuses on the parts cited by the judge to support his decision to overturn the FMCSA’s shutdown.
If you would like a transcript of the entire proceeding I can give you the contract information for the court reporters and you can order it.
Feel free to post it here so anyone can take you up on that offer. I’m comfortable with the blog post as it stands.
When a driver grabs a fresh log book for the month, it is generally accepted to represent one driver’s log. When you calculate 30 log pages each from 7 drivers as representing 210 logs, then yes, that is semantics. The fact is that 7 drivers had 54 log errors in 1 month. That is hardly a record of which to be proud.
So, 210 logs divided by 7 drivers would equal 30 full logs for each driver, hopefully sampled across the broad spectrum of drivers employed by DND. 30 logs for each driver is 2 and 1/2 years of samples, if that is what Mr. La Porte meant and what was testified to in court. Not just the worst logbooks and recurrences for these seven drivers. Maybe the FMCSA ‘cherry picked the logs and drivers. 54 violations over 2/12 years for these seven drivers would raise eyebrows if this were a recurring operating modus.
The point being made is at least one person is dead. You can’t bring that one back by tearing out a page in a logbook. so the judge must rule on evidence…….
I would look at how DND Safety processed those 54 violations and take into consideration whether FMCSA cherry picked the logbooks with the worst violations….?? Might see a larger pattern of logbook violations if the mass spectrum of logbooks were observed and investigated.
Sounds like a civil trial may be in order for damages.
remember the 173,000,000 judgement for Bhandal Brothers, posted in these articles and blogs. Vacated by the courts as excessive…… yet, the jury was out to take some hides and make a point about poor and reckless judgement by trucking companies. Bhandal is still running too.
When will drivers do the right thing and PARK IT!?
Never….will just remain new age slaves to DOT and Congress and Big Business and the general American Public who believe it’s okay to treat drivers poorly as long as they get what they want?
Thanks for the ammunition!
“RV, his view of the stopped vehicles blocked by the tractor-trailer in front him until the tractor-trailer’s sudden lane change, was unable to stop in time, and he crashed into the stopped vehicles.”
FOLLOWING TO CLOSE!
The driver was just doing what he had to do to keep his job. The company’s make it all the drivers fault. When ever there is a mishap and deny that they had anything to do with it let alone being the root cause. Just remember when you are behind the wheel you are in control. Don’t drive if you can’t a job isn’t worth a life.
Well, death and injury resulted from total disregard for rules/law. No disputing that! An attorney can put a dollop of cream and a cherry on a pile of shit, but it’s still a pile of shit!
Inconsistencies and or inaccurate information happen in all forms of news reporting, but I say ‘Great job’ to Samual Barradas for your passion to inform us drivers. Thank you.
Oh, by the way, can David L. LaPorte forward me his # (NOT!) may need his litigation to sweeten a judge if I happen to slip into a horrible life of HOS violations, rogue road rage issues or worse! Maybe he can argue the fact that after being subject to so many rules n regulations and the traumas of being over the road that a driver may suffer from TDADD (truck driver attention deficit disorder) or somethin totally ludacris that the court systems would gullibly accept. I like his attitude that ‘it was just a couple HOS violations’. That makes it all better huh. Yep they redeemed themselves cause it wasn’t as many as projected. My God! Someone please beat me with a load bar!
This website should be called the DOT report since y’all believe any B.S. they claim. One guy screwed up so the DOT went after the entire company and the rest of the drivers just because they were old school and didn’t have Nanny logs and sattelite tracking.
This must be the first article you’ve read on this site, because it’s rare that I agree with what the FMCSA is doing. But I’ll gladly support them when they take action against the unsafe companies that are making the rest of us look bad.
I don’t think this wreck was the innocent, unavoidable accident the defense lawyer would like you to believe it is. Read these articles covering different aspects of the case to get a better view of what happened: Chicago Tribune, NBC, Daily Herald, Sun Times
Bhandal Bros….anyone remember them? 173,000,000 judgement reported here and
the courts vacated the judgement because it was excessive!
I for one, don’t agree with every thing presented by Mr. Barradas, yet when he reports someone killed, the attorney for the defense says in reply that it was only a couple of violations.
Bob VanDuzer, did you not get it that some one was killed and the patrolman, regardless if you like him or not, was doing his job, hopefully as safe as you do yours, and is, by Mr. Barradas report, still in critical condition?
You cannot bring back the dead man by ripping out a page of a loose leaf log book.
Bob VanDuzer your reply is shameful! Tsk, Tsk!
If he hadn’t falsified would there even be an issue? If he was monitored every minute and it still happened who would we blame then? Following the letter of the law does not make everyone safe at all time’s. Accident’s happen and can not always be prevented. As a owner with drivers and a driver you don’t know every move someone make’s even with an EOBR or ELD. Should you hold everyone responsible for one person’s mistake? Face it thing’s happen good and bad it’s called life.
I hope the judge made a good decision based on the facts. This company will surely be under scrutiny for some time if they get back in business. Hopefully the problems will be corrected. It’s just too bad it took a death to do it.
I don’t know anything about this case and have no opinion on it , however I do have an opinion on HOS violations and how they can be misleading. We are a car carrying operation in the NE. Our drivers run about 8 hours per day and take at least 12 hours off before driving again, yet we have quite a few HOS violations, enough to have our ins cancelled. 2 drivers , in the beginning of January 2013 wrote 2012 in the date line. One who stopped for fuel in in Worcester MA didn’t realize that the station was one block over the line in Schrewsbury, MA so his receipt did not match his log book. the last was not putting a total of 24 for total hours, as if there are days without 24 hours. These 4 HOS violations were enough to get a 3 truck operation put out of business. So take things with a bit of scepticism
David LaPorte, lawyer for DND is awesome.DOT loosers got the lesson.Perfect!
Mitch. I don’t quite understand how your Co lost insurance over so few petty HOS infractions. I travel coast to coast and my fuel receipts don’t match as for daylight savings time. If you have a safety officer or coordinator even your dispatcher, like in the company I haul for, dispatchers skim over logs to see if any minor blurps that drivers need attention to. A safety dept also looks at them inter office like before handing them to DOT. I have had two DOT audits and never had an issue. You can’t run like the ol outlaws we were once like days before. Many owner ops do operate on a thin line and will eventually get caught. So do company drivers. It’s not worth it to run illegal and try log legal. Too many ways to hang yourself. More scale houses have electronic recordings linked between each other. Heck how many cameras do u pass by. Even border patrol checkpoints record and photograph your license plates. The camera doesn’t lie. Run honest and legal and be proud of what you do and do it well and you will never have to worry about sweatin a verdict in a court of law. Incidents and accidents may not always be avoidable, hopefully you will never be involve in a fatality accident. It’s not if it will happen, its when! Be safe!
Mr. Lawyer man, you have me simply rolling with laughter! I have done some work in the safety department of a trucking company, and if so much as ONE log is falsified, then they are ALL compromised!
I been driving by this crash site for 35 years, in regular traffic there is always a brake check for several reasons. There’s no excuse for what he did. The crash was on an upgrade behind a viaduct. That may be why he didn’t see it coming. When you go to court in Dupage county, you better bring your A game with your best player’s. Sounds to me like the FMCSA thought it was a slam dunk and got beat up bad.
I thought the driver was ultimately responsible for his logs, not the company ! Driver can refuse to break rules if ask to by company !
I just read the entire decision and there is going to be a furthering effort from the FMCSA to relieve itself of the sampling table methodology that it is using to complete a “top-to-down” investigation of any company that falls under 49 CFR 300-399.
You can bank on this fact and this case probably would have turned out a lot differently had proper subpoenas been utilized to review company and owner/operator records, especially after an accident like this.
Well said Mr. Lewis!
I believe this company has also gotten a different authority and name for some of its trucks. Zora is the name I have been seeing on the trucks pulling the DND trailers around.