previous days logs.......huh?

False.

 

Ineed. No where in the regs does it state this.

 

What's the thinking of not allowing the tandems all the way up? Too much out swing from the trailer?

 

^^^^^THIS^^^^^

 

Agreed. I apologize for not being clear. It would be advisable that a driver keep logs back to their last reset, if running recap for an extended period of time. Typically, drivers who run recap for extended periods of time do so. If they are running honest, why not? Issues were found with Mr. Van Dyke's log book (if there were no issues, the officer would not have asked). As a result, the officer requested the logs. Mr. Van Dyke could have told the officer to pound sand, and provide only 8 days. That would have been lawful per FMCSA. The officer could have then taken a report and pursued a carrier inspection . Mr. Van Dyke had the requested logs on hand, and provided them to the officer. No foul play was at hand here..

Sure, it is not uncommon for drivers to run "tight" logs (especially the old timers who "know the ropes".). Those who are good at it, wear the badge with honor. Officers get it. Both sides of the fence joke about it. Typically, if the driver is disciplined enough to run a tight log effectively, the same attention is paid towards other aspects of their livelihood... and ultimately, these guys are squared away.

But, the tighter the log, the less room there is for error and complacency. In the case of Mr. Van Dyke, he let the log fall behind, ran too optimistic, and mathematically sunk himself.

Again, I'm not defending the officer's actions. Could there have been a better recourse? Possibly. 10 hours out of service for falsified log and possibly a carrier inspection may have been a productive alternative. Officers have to make many tough decisions (and we all know how thick just the FMCSA book is, and then throw in state laws, and then we HAZMAT, and perpetual updates....), and often they will not be "popular," regardless of the recourse. Officers cut drivers and carriers "breaks" all the time, it is part of officer discretion... yet, the officer will often still receive a complaint.

Drivers and carriers often forget that part of the officer's job is to inspect and investigate. If there are no obvious issues, the officer will wrap up the stop with a smile and a clean inspection (believe it or not, officers like clean inspections and a favorable outcome). For every inspection riddled with violations, there are 10 clean inspections, which are positive for the driver and carrier.

Officers often hear complaints that they are revenue chasers. Seriously, those who have been in the trucking industry know that serious violations are abundant. We all can agree that violations don't have to be "chased," they are abundant. Heck, drivers are quick to point out all the other violators as a reason why they themselves shouldn't be "hassled." Seems that for every driver that cusses officers, there is another stating the industry needs more enforcement (... not to confused with regulations, too completely different beasts!).

Anyway, be safe and take care. Again, believe it or not, officers are on the side of the driver and carrier. That is why they perform their job and make unpleasant decisions at times... they decisions are made to protect the public and the industry, not impede it. The respect is mutual (in a perfect world anyway!). Cheers.

 

Something like that... someone more "intelligent" than the rest of us make the laws (ha!). I think Michigan's wheelbase law actually makes sense for general safety, while allowing room to adjust tandems to effectively distribute the load weight (only applies to 53' trailers, wheelbase from center of king-pin to center of rear tandem assembly needs to be between 37' and 41'). Saves rear ends from bouncing all over the place. It also helps prevent traffic lights, curbs/sidewalks, and front end of cars from being run over (tandems thrown all the way back). Of course, there will be arguments against. It isn't the officer's discretion to make the laws.

 

There is nothing on the books requiring a 34 hour reset. The only limit (in my case) would be the 70 hour clock. As long as my 8 days worth of drive time do not exceed 70h hours, that is all any law enforcement will be concerned with other than form and manner mistakes like the wrong date shown for this driver.

I took a log page out and made 8x11 copies of it because it is easier to feed into the transflo machine. Oftentime there will be ten or more days of sheets in my binder and when the officer wants to see my logs I peel off just today's and the previous 7 right in front of them, holding back the previous days in my posession.

Got a note from accountant, they are now recommending holding the logs 7 solid years now for IRS accountability. Evidently IRS is pretty desperate for dollars now that they cannot get them from the uber rich, they are targeting middle class people to the max.

 

You bring up an excellent point... taking into consideration that Mr. Van Dyke's log book was falsified on the day on the inspection, noting that he recorded traveling 250 miles in his final 1.25 hours of travel, there could have been a 70 hour violation. That could have accounted for the 34 hour out of service order (taking into consideration his last 34 hour reset took place two weeks prior). But, that is speculation. Only the officer and Mr. Van Dyke know for sure.

 

Agreed. All one would have to do is looking at the 8 days worth of logs, calculate the distances for the max time given (70 hours) and determine the guy drove well over the allowed time for the distance provided and therefore may have been the impetus for the 34 hour OOS order.