Webinar Replay #53: Using the DataQ System Effectively

1
00:00:03.630 –> 00:00:06.130
Steve Kessler: Good afternoon, everyone

2
00:00:06.200 –> 00:00:15.690
Steve Kessler: appreciate you. Join us this afternoon. Welcome to our fast forward Webinar series, sponsored by the Infinit-I Workforce Solutions

3
00:00:15.760 –> 00:00:26.700
Steve Kessler: very much appreciate y’all taking some of your time to join us today. We’ve got a really, I think, very important topic. I know I’ve had conversations with a lot of companies

4
00:00:26.770 –> 00:00:39.270
Steve Kessler: over time about the DataQ system. Obviously, you all know that it’s there to help you challenge information that FMC is holding that you may think is incomplete or incorrect.

5
00:00:39.870 –> 00:00:49.550
Steve Kessler: But I will have to say there, a lot of folks have had great luck with it. Some have not had good luck with it, and others have not even tried to use it.

6
00:00:49.630 –> 00:01:08.590
Steve Kessler: So once again, I think we got a great program and a great presenter today. What I would like you to do, if you don’t mind, is just jump on that chat box down there at the bottom. Let us know who you are and who you’re with, maybe where you’re from, so we can get to know you a little bit.

7
00:01:08.630 –> 00:01:26.520
Steve Kessler: And while you’re doing that, I wanted to say a couple of things about Vertical Alliance Group in the Infinit-I Workforce Solutions. You know, as a company, we’re we’re really dedicated to empowering and streamlining safety programs for transportation companies.

8
00:01:26.590 –> 00:01:30.330
Steve Kessler: both for hire and private, across the United States.

9
00:01:30.690 –> 00:01:36.979
Steve Kessler: You know, with about 850 training videos and a customizable

10
00:01:37.050 –> 00:01:41.680
Steve Kessler: learning management system that you can automate track and

11
00:01:41.720 –> 00:01:51.720
Steve Kessler: literally document all aspects of training. It’s really no wonder, why, we have nearly 2,000 companies that have chosen the Infinit-I Workforce Solutions.

12
00:01:52.140 –> 00:02:12.359
Steve Kessler: So you know, the system not only makes it easy to build an affordable best in class training program for your drivers, but I think even as important. It frees up your administrative time while still giving you the ability to communicate more effectively and train your employees anywhere, anytime.

13
00:02:12.410 –> 00:02:28.340
Steve Kessler: So if you’re really committed to have a training program that proves you value your safety over just about everything else check us out at infinitiworkforce.com. You can see that link there in the bottom, right hand corner of the screen.

14
00:02:28.860 –> 00:02:41.449
Steve Kessler: So now I would like to introduce you to our guest today. That’s gonna kind of give us some good information about the DataQ system. I want you all to welcome Richard Goins.

15
00:02:41.520 –> 00:02:45.059
Steve Kessler: Richard is really an industry veteran.

16
00:02:45.260 –> 00:02:49.790
Steve Kessler: Gosh, I I’ve met you a couple of times, Richard. Richard has

17
00:02:49.820 –> 00:03:00.790
Steve Kessler: over 30 years experience as a driver, a fleet manager, a trainer. and then he kind of went on the other side and spent what about 15 years, I believe?

18
00:03:00.850 –> 00:03:08.740
Steve Kessler: With the Oregon Department of Transportation as an investigator and as an adjudicator of DataQs

19
00:03:08.980 –> 00:03:14.939
Steve Kessler: Richard has conducted over 5,000 CVSA truck inspections

20
00:03:15.180 –> 00:03:23.010
Steve Kessler: and has coached dozens, if not hundreds, of new inspectors and law enforcement agencies

21
00:03:23.130 –> 00:03:34.069
Steve Kessler: from all over the State of Oregon. And I guess today, Richard, you help a lot of your own companies. In your position there with TLC companies

22
00:03:34.190 –> 00:03:44.699
Steve Kessler: to help them and advise them on regulatory compliance and safety issues, and I’m sure you help them quite a bit with DataQ also.

23
00:03:44.880 –> 00:03:49.610
Steve Kessler: So, having said all that, Richard, welcome and thanks for joining us today.

24
00:03:50.780 –> 00:03:53.929
Richard Goins: thank you, I appreciate it. It’s good to be here.

25
00:03:54.230 –> 00:03:59.299
Richard Goins: Actually, I was with the Oregon Department of Transportation for 10 years. But

26
00:03:59.780 –> 00:04:06.750
Richard Goins: I overestimate you a little bit sorry about that. I just like to be honest, fair enough.

27
00:04:07.750 –> 00:04:10.059
Richard Goins: So DataQs are.

28
00:04:10.400 –> 00:04:18.350
Richard Goins: that was one of the last things that I ended up doing with the State of Oregon and adjudicating a DataQ, or being a

29
00:04:18.730 –> 00:04:20.569
Richard Goins: analyst

30
00:04:20.690 –> 00:04:28.010
Richard Goins: who chooses whether or not determines whether or not a violation should be removed or retain.

31
00:04:28.790 –> 00:04:30.549
Richard Goins: It’s kind of a

32
00:04:32.110 –> 00:04:41.490
Richard Goins: It’s you’re on kind of a blank slate. What the Feds offer is a very simple

33
00:04:43.020 –> 00:04:45.240
Richard Goins: set of guidelines for how

34
00:04:45.600 –> 00:04:53.250
Richard Goins: violations should be kept or removed. There is no certification process for doing that, like there is with

35
00:04:53.370 –> 00:05:03.670
Richard Goins: becoming a truck inspector, or getting your hazardous materials they figure by the time you’ve done that been in it long enough they’re not gonna have you get set up for certification?

36
00:05:04.080 –> 00:05:09.399
Richard Goins: the most important thing when you’re getting ready to

37
00:05:09.450 –> 00:05:12.390
Richard Goins: conduct a DataQ is

38
00:05:13.390 –> 00:05:19.250
Richard Goins: looking at a truck inspection for what it really is, and it isn’t. It isn’t like a ticket.

39
00:05:19.440 –> 00:05:24.270
Richard Goins: Where an officer witnesses something, pulls you over and

40
00:05:24.920 –> 00:05:28.240
Richard Goins: writes a citation with a monetary penalty.

41
00:05:28.960 –> 00:05:34.049
Richard Goins: What an inspection is! Really, if you go to the next slide.

42
00:05:36.160 –> 00:05:44.869
Richard Goins: it’s the window and time where the condition of the truck driver are documented to create the correct view of the carrier safety protocols.

43
00:05:45.640 –> 00:05:46.650
Richard Goins: So.

44
00:05:47.170 –> 00:06:00.950
Richard Goins: basically, what a good inspector should be doing is not choosing necessarily which violations to write, but just documenting what they’re finding on the truck at the time that they had it stopped.

45
00:06:01.000 –> 00:06:07.169
Richard Goins: So that means the day of the stop. So if they’re looking at the log, they’re looking at that day the previous 7,

46
00:06:07.430 –> 00:06:10.290
Richard Goins: and they’re looking at the driver’s condition. Whether

47
00:06:10.370 –> 00:06:14.469
Richard Goins: they’re compliant with medical, with

48
00:06:14.520 –> 00:06:19.130
Richard Goins: whether or not they’re CDL’s current things like that next slide.

49
00:06:21.410 –> 00:06:28.340
Richard Goins: I’ll go over this kind of quick, just because of the fact that I think the most valuable thing is answering questions.

50
00:06:28.490 –> 00:06:33.499
Richard Goins: so the purpose of the system

51
00:06:34.000 –> 00:06:40.870
Richard Goins: and a DataQ is to provide industry partners the opportunity to dispute

52
00:06:41.030 –> 00:06:45.429
Richard Goins: whether or not a violation was written within policy.

53
00:06:45.460 –> 00:06:49.020
Richard Goins: So if a truck inspections written.

54
00:06:49.060 –> 00:07:00.449
Richard Goins: and you have a violation written outside of Policy 14 or Policy 15. Those operational policies determine how and when violation should be cited.

55
00:07:00.750 –> 00:07:04.569
Richard Goins: so it’s really important

56
00:07:04.750 –> 00:07:05.850
Richard Goins: for

57
00:07:06.050 –> 00:07:11.990
Richard Goins: inspectors to follow those operational policies. One of the other things that

58
00:07:12.760 –> 00:07:25.799
Richard Goins: is proposed for this system. One of the reasons is, you know, inspectors like me. I make mistakes. I’ve cited the wrong carrier. I’ve cited the wrong driver, and there are ways that this can happen with the electronic system.

59
00:07:26.300 –> 00:07:37.379
Richard Goins: And Sometimes truck inspectors are going through, and they’re looking at various violations, and they’ll simply click down the next wrong one.

60
00:07:37.690 –> 00:07:43.339
Richard Goins: Other things that will happen that will warrant a DataQ

61
00:07:43.670 –> 00:07:50.530
Richard Goins: will be if a carrier qualified for an exception or an exemption.

62
00:07:51.050 –> 00:07:54.470
Richard Goins: So we had during

63
00:07:55.200 –> 00:08:03.420
Richard Goins: Covid we had the Covid exemptions so that we could get certain types of commodities through in a timely manner.

64
00:08:03.770 –> 00:08:10.750
Richard Goins: and not all inspectors who do inspections are up to date constantly, because there’s a lot going on.

65
00:08:10.820 –> 00:08:15.729
Richard Goins: Oftentimes, when law enforcement is working in this industry.

66
00:08:17.330 –> 00:08:24.150
Richard Goins: truck inspections are a very small part of what they do. So sometimes they’ll miss a new exemption.

67
00:08:24.190 –> 00:08:28.479
Richard Goins: That is an emergency exemption, for whether it’s

68
00:08:28.660 –> 00:08:32.020
Richard Goins: something like Covid, or it’s something to do with

69
00:08:32.299 –> 00:08:41.540
Richard Goins: snowstorms, for instance. You’ll see winter exceptions for carriers who are operating, hauling propane.

70
00:08:41.870 –> 00:08:47.590
Richard Goins: and they have got to get them through. So they’ll do a §395 exception for hours of service

71
00:08:48.900 –> 00:08:49.980
Richard Goins: slide.

72
00:08:56.910 –> 00:08:59.250
Richard Goins: Well. sorry about that.

73
00:09:00.680 –> 00:09:12.659
Richard Goins: So some of the things that answer questions that I answer a lot are carriers will want to challenge every single violation, and I strongly suggest not to do that.

74
00:09:12.800 –> 00:09:17.049
Richard Goins: There’s a lot of reasons when you submit a DataQ.

75
00:09:17.250 –> 00:09:29.520
Richard Goins: The person that you’re talking to was likely an inspector at one time. In fact, they really should have been, and they should have done a lot of inspections. and every request for review and inspection.

76
00:09:29.600 –> 00:09:35.779
Richard Goins: right or wrong, creates an impression of the carrier with that agency. So if

77
00:09:35.830 –> 00:09:39.590
Richard Goins: you dispute every single violation

78
00:09:39.910 –> 00:09:51.229
Richard Goins: that’s written that are that some of them clearly had to be there. You’re gonna start off with a really bad impression for the individual who’s conducting the DataQ

79
00:09:51.640 –> 00:09:57.250
Richard Goins: and carriers want to be seen as partners with the FMCSA. And not.

80
00:09:57.340 –> 00:10:02.929
Richard Goins: you know. It’s it’s important for both sides that we approach everything from a partner point of view.

81
00:10:03.560 –> 00:10:12.769
Richard Goins: Time spent challenging valid violations not being spent. Correct isn’t being spent correctly. In my opinion. If you know that you had a violation.

82
00:10:13.490 –> 00:10:14.170
okay.

83
00:10:14.750 –> 00:10:26.669
Richard Goins: when I’ve run trucking companies and fleets this is really important to me to spend my time correcting errors that I’ve had, and we have some errors. I’ve had quite a few over the years.

84
00:10:26.700 –> 00:10:28.500
Richard Goins: And that’s a better

85
00:10:28.830 –> 00:10:33.470
Richard Goins: choice or better priority for the time.

86
00:10:33.780 –> 00:10:35.419
Richard Goins: Repeated attempts

87
00:10:36.610 –> 00:10:47.029
Richard Goins: are not necessarily a good idea. Generally the policy allows for a single attempt, and then there’s some new

88
00:10:47.080 –> 00:10:57.869
Richard Goins: policies coming out now, will they allow 2, and then it will move on to a independent system if the new policy comes up.

89
00:10:58.570 –> 00:10:59.350
Richard Goins: But

90
00:11:03.000 –> 00:11:07.960
Richard Goins: it’s really important to remember who the audience is. So when you’re presenting

91
00:11:07.990 –> 00:11:13.459
Richard Goins: your facts, and that’s really all you want to present is facts

92
00:11:13.910 –> 00:11:15.640
Richard Goins: per request or review.

93
00:11:16.860 –> 00:11:25.080
Richard Goins: The individuals probably going to be a long term officer. They’ve conducted thousands of truck inspections. They’ve got dozens of officers that

94
00:11:25.090 –> 00:11:34.350
Richard Goins: they manage. and that in person is going to be really interested in whether or not

95
00:11:34.500 –> 00:11:45.360
Richard Goins: policy was followed. Whether or not the inspection was written properly. Sometimes inspectors will write an inspection in such a way that it just doesn’t make any sense.

96
00:11:45.530 –> 00:11:49.340
Richard Goins: They’ll use the canned verbiage within the system.

97
00:11:49.620 –> 00:11:52.090
Richard Goins: and then the notes that they make are separate.

98
00:11:52.250 –> 00:11:56.909
Richard Goins: If that can verbage and the notes they make don’t blend

99
00:11:57.070 –> 00:12:01.839
Richard Goins: what I strongly suggest is you should provide them facts photos

100
00:12:02.140 –> 00:12:07.140
Richard Goins: especially if it’s, you know, wrong driver, one wrong carrier. Something to that effect.

101
00:12:07.890 –> 00:12:12.410
Richard Goins: But this person’s gonna be a really fact oriented individual

102
00:12:12.510 –> 00:12:13.380
Richard Goins: slide.

103
00:12:17.930 –> 00:12:24.589
Richard Goins: And this kind of kind of thing. Reviewing officials will be concerned with things like. Did the violation exist

104
00:12:24.760 –> 00:12:34.790
Richard Goins: at the time of the inspection? Was the violation written within guidelines? Did the inspector correctly interpret the regulation? This is one where you’re writing your DataQ, where

105
00:12:34.820 –> 00:12:44.930
Richard Goins: you wanna go ahead and copy and paste the regulation, and then go back into the regulations, find the interpretation, and look and see if there’s a question within the interpretation that

106
00:12:45.610 –> 00:13:07.970
Richard Goins: supports your point of view. And oftentimes there will be. There’s a lot of data within the FMCSA system that you’ll be able to find whether their questions and answers or their fact sheets and use the fact sheets right out of the DataQ system. It’s really hard for an adjudicator to look at that and say, no, you got to keep it.

107
00:13:11.800 –> 00:13:19.790
Richard Goins: Facts that I wouldn’t consider, you know, and the Feds cover this in their their new policy review that they’re doing at this is

108
00:13:21.300 –> 00:13:36.569
Richard Goins: requesting leniency, you know. It was the drivers first offense. Beings, that what they’re trying to do is document the condition? It won’t matter whether it it seems fair or was the drivers first offense, or if it was a minor violation.

109
00:13:37.350 –> 00:13:57.890
Richard Goins: Violations carry different points for a reason so, and some of them carry none at all. If you go in to look at your truck inspections on your SMS profile, you’ll see that some very clearly. Say not included an SMS. And when you see something like that you don’t want to waste your time trying to remove the violation, because it doesn’t really carry any weight.

110
00:13:58.360 –> 00:14:03.000
Richard Goins: One of the other things is. if a carrier’s having a lot of trouble.

111
00:14:03.060 –> 00:14:05.170
Richard Goins: And they’re

112
00:14:05.180 –> 00:14:16.150
Richard Goins: really hoping to get a violation removed. For that reason I can guarantee nobody’s going to remove a violation for that reason that would be in direct, direct contravention of Federal policy.

113
00:14:17.010 –> 00:14:24.279
Richard Goins: If you’re having a really hard time, and you find that you know this violation is the one that you think’s gonna put you over the top.

114
00:14:24.950 –> 00:14:36.330
Richard Goins: Find any other reason? Then you’re having a hard time because it’s not gonna really change. What’s happening. It’s unfortunate, but the system isn’t fair. It just simply is

115
00:14:36.560 –> 00:14:38.560
Richard Goins: you know. So next slide.

116
00:14:42.400 –> 00:14:47.820
Richard Goins: this is really important violation citations and warnings. so

117
00:14:49.590 –> 00:14:52.119
Richard Goins: a violation can only be written

118
00:14:53.220 –> 00:14:55.410
a CVSA truck inspection.

119
00:14:56.100 –> 00:15:01.800
Richard Goins: It won’t be added to a ticket or a citation that an officer gives you.

120
00:15:02.140 –> 00:15:05.179
Richard Goins: At last the 2 are written in conjunction with one another.

121
00:15:05.560 –> 00:15:18.869
Richard Goins: so you can have a violation and no citation. You can have a citation and no violation. For instance, officers that are not trained fmcs. A personnel who are certified to do truck inspections can’t

122
00:15:19.340 –> 00:15:27.959
Richard Goins: create a truck inspection. They can’t write a violation. They can only cite the driver and the carrier with some type of monetary penalty.

123
00:15:28.550 –> 00:15:39.570
Richard Goins: Violations written on inspections. They don’t carry any weight on a driver’s DMV Record. They only carry weight as far as the CSA is concerned.

124
00:15:40.340 –> 00:15:41.060
Richard Goins: Oh.

125
00:15:42.920 –> 00:15:51.689
Richard Goins: violate or yeah, violations are put on a company’s record for 2 years and on a driver’s record for 3 years.

126
00:15:51.740 –> 00:15:57.879
Richard Goins: Crash information carried out for 5. Citations are often

127
00:15:57.940 –> 00:16:10.949
Richard Goins: subject to a State agency. The DMV. For instance, they can be in written like I said, in addition to a violation and any non-certified sworn officer can ride him.

128
00:16:11.100 –> 00:16:16.169
Richard Goins: and they’re not adjudicated through the DataQ system. The important thing to remember about this

129
00:16:16.270 –> 00:16:26.920
Richard Goins: is if the driver was cited with a violation, also received a citation before you begin the day to queue process. What you’re gonna want to do is

130
00:16:26.940 –> 00:16:30.760
Richard Goins: fight the ticket in court. and

131
00:16:31.170 –> 00:16:36.009
Richard Goins: that carries the most weight. So if a judge removes the citation.

132
00:16:36.170 –> 00:16:45.600
Richard Goins: Dismisses it, lowers it. I can almost guarantee that at some level something is gonna change depending on the policy and the type of violation

133
00:16:45.770 –> 00:16:46.680
Richard Goins: with

134
00:16:47.030 –> 00:16:52.559
Richard Goins: the DataQ. So they will remove or alter the information within the system.

135
00:16:54.050 –> 00:17:01.959
Richard Goins: What’s supposed to say there on that is warning, not subtitle. I don’t know where that came from

136
00:17:02.350 –> 00:17:07.020
Richard Goins: Warnings are totally separate from both of these

137
00:17:08.700 –> 00:17:10.170
Richard Goins: types of

138
00:17:10.490 –> 00:17:25.990
Richard Goins: citations or or recordings. When a warning is written, you’ll sometimes see. Unfortunately, you’ll see that a violation was put on a truck inspection, and then in the center, where there’s citation, they’ll say warning.

139
00:17:26.480 –> 00:17:30.110
Richard Goins: Sometimes officers are under the incorrect

140
00:17:30.700 –> 00:17:39.479
Richard Goins: impression that a violation and a warning of the same thing, and they’re not the violation carries. Wait with this CSA

141
00:17:39.790 –> 00:17:54.609
Richard Goins: A warning is often used sometimes, in my opinion, just to demonstrate that the officer had PC for the stop. So if they just write a warning, you really don’t want them to put that on the inspection, or you don’t want them to do an inspection and put

142
00:17:54.690 –> 00:17:56.780
Richard Goins: the site for the warning on there, too.

143
00:17:57.280 –> 00:18:04.700
Richard Goins: But warnings don’t carry through to the CVSA or the FMCSA. And they don’t affect a driver’s driving record.

144
00:18:05.720 –> 00:18:09.539
Richard Goins: when you’re looking at these

145
00:18:10.790 –> 00:18:12.760
Richard Goins: different enforcement

146
00:18:12.940 –> 00:18:26.510
Richard Goins: tools, you wanna really watch carefully before you start, because it is really important. Start with the court. If you have a citation and that will give you weight with the FMCSA partner. When you go to the DataQ.

147
00:18:26.580 –> 00:18:30.740
Richard Goins: I wouldn’t ever mess with a warning because they carry no weight.

148
00:18:30.830 –> 00:18:35.980
Richard Goins: Oftentimes they’re not recorded for long periods of time.

149
00:18:36.630 –> 00:18:39.620
Richard Goins: and they’re just used. If

150
00:18:40.000 –> 00:18:48.270
Richard Goins: if a record is made of the warning, it’ll be used to determine whether or not the next time a driver is stopped. If there’s going to be enforcement action

151
00:18:48.860 –> 00:18:49.770
Richard Goins: Slide.

152
00:18:52.250 –> 00:18:58.299
Richard Goins: So really, we’re at a point where I want to do the most

153
00:18:58.380 –> 00:19:01.519
Richard Goins: beneficial thing for everybody and

154
00:19:01.810 –> 00:19:15.299
Richard Goins: covering all this material is unimportant if we’re not answering questions, and there’s several resources that are here. But the most important thing is that we take very specific situations.

155
00:19:15.380 –> 00:19:18.540
Richard Goins: And we attack those

156
00:19:18.550 –> 00:19:20.050
Richard Goins: DataQ

157
00:19:20.790 –> 00:19:25.949
Richard Goins: are something that take up a lot of time within a state agency.

158
00:19:26.050 –> 00:19:33.639
Richard Goins: and they’re taken very seriously. But there is not a uniform system right now in place.

159
00:19:33.790 –> 00:19:42.299
Richard Goins: and they’re getting ready to change that. As a matter of fact, it’s great that we’re doing this because we really need public comment on this

160
00:19:42.370 –> 00:19:46.810
Richard Goins: to get the FMCSA. To move on it and make a more uniform system.

161
00:19:49.830 –> 00:20:00.809
Richard Goins: But I’ve covered the information that I have at the front. Steve, do you have any questions? Thanks for that information, Richard?

162
00:20:00.890 –> 00:20:08.909
Steve Kessler: one of the questions that came in, and you mentioned it briefly, if a citation was dismissed.

163
00:20:09.360 –> 00:20:13.729
Steve Kessler: can we DataQ it? And how will it affect the company’s record?

164
00:20:14.520 –> 00:20:16.699
Richard Goins: So if a citation’s dismissed

165
00:20:17.230 –> 00:20:28.999
Richard Goins: with the vast majority of citations, the violation should be removed from the inspection, and it will remove those points from their CSA. So what you’ll see is.

166
00:20:29.040 –> 00:20:33.540
Richard Goins: you might still see the violation in your SMS profile.

167
00:20:33.890 –> 00:20:56.250
Richard Goins: but the points it. When you look at the end, you click on the hyperlink for that inspection with your near SMS profile, and you’ll see on one of the columns, it’ll say, not included in SMS. And that’s how you know whether or not there were points associated with it. So if it was, if it’s still on there and it says, not included in SMS, it’s in some way they’ve removed it.

168
00:20:57.580 –> 00:20:59.029
Steve Kessler: Okay? Great

169
00:20:59.050 –> 00:21:07.119
Steve Kessler: another question from time to time, you know. In a in roadside inspection, for example.

170
00:21:07.200 –> 00:21:12.050
Steve Kessler: there’s some issue with the equipment that’s written up

171
00:21:12.160 –> 00:21:24.790
Steve Kessler: is it allowed, or is it important for a driver to actually take a picture of that as some record of what the the problem was with the equipment. Is that, allowed Richard.

172
00:21:24.840 –> 00:21:36.730
Richard Goins: It’s absolutely allowed. I strongly recommend that drivers always take a picture of what the officers talking about. There are some times when there’s a mechanical issue. And

173
00:21:37.270 –> 00:21:43.650
Richard Goins: within the ASPEN system that the Feds you have created to do electronic truck inspections.

174
00:21:43.750 –> 00:21:50.090
Richard Goins: There are some canned references to air leak under truck.

175
00:21:50.150 –> 00:22:01.519
Richard Goins: and they’ve got that can that way, because we know it wasn’t one of the valves. But we can’t find where it is. So obviously, you can’t take a picture of that. But a video, and you can hear it

176
00:22:01.560 –> 00:22:09.140
Richard Goins: can help. And especially if you believe it’s coming from one of the valves

177
00:22:09.500 –> 00:22:16.670
Richard Goins: between the breaks or something like that. It’s it’s really good idea to have that little bit of video from your phone.

178
00:22:17.620 –> 00:22:24.360
Steve Kessler: right? That’s good to know. Would you suggest, you know from your background, Richard, that

179
00:22:24.590 –> 00:22:28.469
Steve Kessler: this kind of information would be something that you should

180
00:22:28.550 –> 00:22:35.790
Steve Kessler: train your drivers a little bit on how to behave and act and participate in an inspection.

181
00:22:36.380 –> 00:22:42.159
Richard Goins: Every driver that I currently work with I provide this information to.

182
00:22:42.180 –> 00:22:45.499
Richard Goins: I do my best to train them on

183
00:22:45.610 –> 00:23:00.959
Richard Goins: how to handle a truck inspection, how to engage with the officer. If you feel like you need to dispute the violation. I train all the drivers that I work with that. If you feel like the inspections being written, an error.

184
00:23:01.110 –> 00:23:04.389
Richard Goins: I would always approach the inspector.

185
00:23:04.480 –> 00:23:08.950
Richard Goins: With the questions, could you explain this to me? I don’t think I’m understanding it.

186
00:23:09.080 –> 00:23:13.780
Richard Goins: And if you have the electronic

187
00:23:14.470 –> 00:23:19.679
Richard Goins: CFR. And you can point out what the exact regulation states.

188
00:23:19.860 –> 00:23:25.719
Richard Goins: and just say to the officer, Hey, this is what this says. Could you explain to me how this applies. Here

189
00:23:26.420 –> 00:23:29.050
Richard Goins: I as an inspector.

190
00:23:29.130 –> 00:23:42.139
Richard Goins: as long as the driver is being respectful and cooperative, I never have any problem with that, as a matter of fact, I’ve learned a lot more from the errors that I made in inspections than all of the correct things that I did

191
00:23:42.780 –> 00:23:43.950
Steve Kessler: makes sense.

192
00:23:44.090 –> 00:23:56.839
Steve Kessler: Here’s kind of a specific question Leo’s asked. I have 2 seatbelt warnings that are showing on our SMS record both our severity weight of 7.

193
00:23:57.330 –> 00:24:00.249
Steve Kessler: Can you kind of talk about

194
00:24:00.450 –> 00:24:02.889
Steve Kessler: what kind of circumstance we have here?

195
00:24:03.240 –> 00:24:17.690
Richard Goins: So what happened was, is the officer probably felt like he was doing the driver a favor by not issuing a citation with the monetary penalty to. So they’ll put that warning there under citation, and it’s going to show up in the inspection.

196
00:24:18.350 –> 00:24:39.599
Richard Goins: because it’s in the inspection. It’s going to carry those points. If you go to that in your in your SMS profile to where that inspection is, and double click on that hyperlink for that inspection. You’re gonna see a column there under that inspection that says included in SMS. And if it says Yes, you know those points are there for it.

197
00:24:40.210 –> 00:24:45.290
Richard Goins: I can almost guarantee you. Those points are going to be attributed to your SMS profile.

198
00:24:46.670 –> 00:25:02.359
Steve Kessler: Very good another question. Now this comes from Leslie. Leslie is asking crash data stays in the system for 5 years. Do the points associated with the crash remain for 5 years

199
00:25:06.450 –> 00:25:09.190
Richard Goins: kind of a grey spot.

200
00:25:12.800 –> 00:25:13.840
Richard Goins: I don’t

201
00:25:13.980 –> 00:25:27.209
Richard Goins: think I totally comprehend. I’m just gonna be honest here, how those points are adjudicated. So I’ve done hundreds of compliance reviews what we in the side of the industry call on a DOT audit

202
00:25:28.270 –> 00:25:31.419
Richard Goins: and within the

203
00:25:33.160 –> 00:25:35.829
Richard Goins: what is it called the methodology.

204
00:25:35.990 –> 00:25:38.170
Richard Goins: I have never reviewed

205
00:25:38.210 –> 00:25:53.499
Richard Goins: the crash data. When you do a compliance review and you enter it into the current system used to be CAPRI. And now it’s AIM. You go into that, and you enter the crashes that are in the company’s profile.

206
00:25:53.820 –> 00:25:57.480
Richard Goins: and it automatically

207
00:25:57.540 –> 00:26:06.060
Richard Goins: adjudicates some level of I don’t wanna say fault, but it does affect the carriers

208
00:26:06.320 –> 00:26:10.440
Richard Goins: branding.

209
00:26:10.490 –> 00:26:15.380
Richard Goins: I’ve never seen the exact points associated with a crash because

210
00:26:15.430 –> 00:26:28.600
Richard Goins: crashes are not listed in the system based on whether or not it’s a carrier’s fault. you know. We’ve probably heard the FMCSA somebody within the the Administration say

211
00:26:28.720 –> 00:26:33.170
Richard Goins: carriers who have crashes have crashes. So

212
00:26:33.970 –> 00:26:36.639
Richard Goins: what they’re getting at is that

213
00:26:36.680 –> 00:26:46.370
Richard Goins: the more crashes the carrier has, the more likely they are to have them. It doesn’t really carry points. But in a compliance review it’s going to affect your review, for sure

214
00:26:46.540 –> 00:26:48.660
Richard Goins: it will affect what they call rating.

215
00:26:49.700 –> 00:26:51.879
Richard Goins: I don’t know if that really answers your question.

216
00:26:52.590 –> 00:26:59.130
Steve Kessler: Well, yeah, it sounds like there’s and like you said, a little gray area there. So

217
00:26:59.140 –> 00:27:15.119
Steve Kessler: perhaps that can be research some more and find out if there’s any more definitive information.

218
00:27:15.850 –> 00:27:28.179
Richard Goins: When you go into the crash preventability program that they have, and you apply to have a crash removed. If it wasn’t a carrier’s fault, they will never remove that crash. because it’s just. It’s just that there was a crash. so I don’t believe that they carry points like a flat tire.

219
00:27:28.790 –> 00:27:29.650
Steve Kessler: Gotcha.

220
00:27:30.820 –> 00:27:48.470
Steve Kessler: Okay? Another question here. This comes from Tim. Tim says, what is a reasonable amount of time to expect an inspection, violation, or accident preventability ruling to be reviewed once submitted by the carrier.

221
00:27:48.800 –> 00:27:54.610
Steve Kessler: And is there anything we can do if an agency takes longer than normal to review.

222
00:27:55.760 –> 00:28:00.180
Richard Goins: So all crash preventability data challenges

223
00:28:00.340 –> 00:28:06.229
Richard Goins: are conducted by the FMCSA. They don’t have their state partners

224
00:28:06.630 –> 00:28:12.530
Richard Goins: participate in that. And there’s way fewer people within the FMCSA than there are

225
00:28:12.640 –> 00:28:19.590
Richard Goins: with regard to their partners, so you can often see a crash. Take as much as 90 days to review

226
00:28:20.280 –> 00:28:34.040
Richard Goins: and I’ve seen them reviewed within 30, but they are going to take the longest. I don’t think that a DataQ for a hours of service violation should take more than a week.

227
00:28:35.330 –> 00:28:36.070
Steve Kessler: Okay.

228
00:28:36.440 –> 00:28:43.579
Richard Goins: but what happens with that is the individuals responsible for it will receive an email. But there’s a

229
00:28:46.190 –> 00:28:49.500
Richard Goins: What is it? RDR. In their

230
00:28:49.590 –> 00:28:57.140
Richard Goins: queue, and they have, I think I had 4 days to respond, but that was always

231
00:28:57.350 –> 00:29:04.390
Richard Goins: that had to do with a state policy, and that’s one of the things that they’re looking at is because there isn’t really any uniformity.

232
00:29:05.640 –> 00:29:06.430
Steve Kessler: Okay?

233
00:29:06.680 –> 00:29:20.160
Steve Kessler: And do you think, is there anything that the the carrier. The the agency can do. If it’s it’s just taking too long. Are you think it’s taken too long? Is there a follow up?

234
00:29:20.730 –> 00:29:24.039
Richard Goins: I have something right here that I,

235
00:29:25.370 –> 00:29:28.330
Richard Goins: because I was thinking I might hear this question.

236
00:29:33.540 –> 00:29:38.900
Richard Goins: apologize. I I’ve got a lot of things open here and hope so. I could help people with us.

237
00:29:48.800 –> 00:29:57.239
Richard Goins: It’s not there. So the best thing that I can tell you to do is resubmit it

238
00:29:57.910 –> 00:30:06.919
Richard Goins: just, and I know there’s something in there. I haven’t done a DataQ for somebody for a while. I don’t have a DOT number right now. So I obviously I’m not doing them

239
00:30:07.060 –> 00:30:11.030
Richard Goins: I help other people with theirs.

240
00:30:11.120 –> 00:30:15.590
Richard Goins: but it’ll say if you haven’t heard back, don’t resubmit.

241
00:30:15.780 –> 00:30:21.890
Richard Goins: I don’t know if that’s still in there. but if you don’t get any type of review whatsoever.

242
00:30:22.330 –> 00:30:28.150
Richard Goins: You might try resubmitting it. One thing you can do, and

243
00:30:28.270 –> 00:30:31.849
Richard Goins: the FMCSA. Doesn’t like this, and I’m probably gonna get my

244
00:30:32.910 –> 00:30:40.090
Richard Goins: get chewed out for this, but I’ll work for that. I would call the State Administrator’s office.

245
00:30:40.980 –> 00:30:41.690
Richard Goins: Oh.

246
00:30:41.880 –> 00:30:44.739
Richard Goins: some within some Federal agencies.

247
00:30:44.950 –> 00:30:48.460
What you see is unfortunately,

248
00:30:49.830 –> 00:31:00.559
Richard Goins: you don’t get any response to your third email. It’s kind of a joke around it’s not a joke. It it does happen but I would go ahead and call the State Administrators office.

249
00:31:00.580 –> 00:31:06.309
Richard Goins: If you’re in a State like, for instance, State of Missouri, their State police handle it.

250
00:31:06.570 –> 00:31:11.869
Richard Goins: Calling the headquarters is totally okay. It’s probably the best

251
00:31:11.910 –> 00:31:22.929
Richard Goins: thing that you can do if you’re in state of Oregon has the DataQ system is not run by the State police should call the Oregon Department of Transportation or Congress and Compliance Division.

252
00:31:23.140 –> 00:31:27.350
Richard Goins: But you can look these things up. And it’s totally okay to call

253
00:31:27.600 –> 00:31:32.350
Richard Goins: because it should not be taking weeks and weeks to get a response.

254
00:31:33.750 –> 00:31:46.369
Steve Kessler: Great we’re getting a lot of questions here. Richard, so hang on. There’s kind of a general question you may have these numbers in your head. Are there any statistics or numbers

255
00:31:46.450 –> 00:31:55.100
Steve Kessler: on the number of disputes and percentage of disputes approved any numbers on how many passed and how many failed.

256
00:31:56.860 –> 00:32:00.420
Richard Goins: I have never seen anything that provided

257
00:32:02.360 –> 00:32:04.340
Richard Goins: that percentage

258
00:32:05.480 –> 00:32:08.510
Richard Goins: What I can tell you is that

259
00:32:10.530 –> 00:32:14.020
Richard Goins: when I was conducting DataQs

260
00:32:14.180 –> 00:32:17.699
Richard Goins: I would review the inspection.

261
00:32:17.910 –> 00:32:21.429
Richard Goins: I would immediately contact the officer.

262
00:32:21.610 –> 00:32:25.930
Richard Goins: In some states, the officer will have a

263
00:32:27.430 –> 00:32:35.719
Richard Goins: canned area where all their notes per inspection are and won’t have to contact them. I can immediately go to where those to that

264
00:32:38.850 –> 00:32:54.669
Richard Goins: server is, and look up the officer’s notes. If he’s got any photographs, and that way I don’t have to go through the time of waiting for them to get back from work, from vacation, or whatever it is. I can just review the notes and then review the request.

265
00:32:54.760 –> 00:33:06.510
Richard Goins: If the request submitted deals with exemptions, exceptions, and the carrier has demonstrated that they were

266
00:33:08.020 –> 00:33:19.360
Richard Goins: I don’t wanna use the word deserve. But if the exemption or exception applied to them, I would automatically just change it. I’d say when I was doing it, about 10% got

267
00:33:19.800 –> 00:33:23.260
Richard Goins: altered.

268
00:33:23.420 –> 00:33:33.699
Richard Goins: Now, sometimes that means the correct violation was put in. I don’t really like that practice, but that’s what happens if the drive, if the inspector just wrote the wrong violation.

269
00:33:34.210 –> 00:33:42.459
Richard Goins: if I see that an exemption or exception applied to them immediately remove it.

270
00:33:42.510 –> 00:33:48.109
Richard Goins: But I’d say about 10. But I we have a lot of people out doing

271
00:33:48.630 –> 00:33:58.400
Richard Goins: conducting DataQs. Some are doing it as a business, and I don’t have a problem with that and their charging carriers

272
00:33:58.790 –> 00:34:01.489
Richard Goins: per DataQ. So they want to do them.

273
00:34:02.250 –> 00:34:05.209
Richard Goins: So they’ll DataQ things that

274
00:34:05.980 –> 00:34:19.330
Richard Goins: there’s absolutely no reason to challenge it. And so. you know, you might open up your queue and find 7 in the morning. and all of them were from Joes DataQ service. That’s it.

275
00:34:19.550 –> 00:34:24.179
Richard Goins: So it kind of throws off the averages, I would say, Yeah, I can see that.

276
00:34:24.330 –> 00:34:30.929
Steve Kessler: Another question. This comes from Michael. Is there a time limit to when a DataQ must be filed.

277
00:34:31.030 –> 00:34:37.840
Richard Goins: No, if it is in the system. if it’s still, if you’re a carrier

278
00:34:38.100 –> 00:34:45.519
Richard Goins: and it’s on your SMS profile, you can challenge it. If you’re a driver

279
00:34:45.810 –> 00:34:57.970
Richard Goins: and it’s and your carrier, you know the company that you work for has not locked their system, then you can do it up to 3 years because it’s on the drivers. PSP, for 3 years.

280
00:35:00.420 –> 00:35:11.890
Steve Kessler: Alright, here’s somebody. Comment you were. There was a question earlier about the crashes and 5 years and Tommy saying that the FMCSA Told him

281
00:35:11.930 –> 00:35:21.810
Steve Kessler: that the points come off the company 2 years from the date of the accident, even if the crash did not post to the portal until months after the accident.

282
00:35:22.120 –> 00:35:24.300
Steve Kessler: So that’s

283
00:35:24.340 –> 00:35:29.049
Steve Kessler: that’s from from Tommy. That’s what he was told by FMCSA.

284
00:35:29.320 –> 00:35:32.190
Richard Goins: well, I know when you’re doing a compliance review.

285
00:35:35.580 –> 00:35:38.119
Richard Goins: and you go into that system.

286
00:35:38.440 –> 00:35:41.230
Richard Goins: How it affects the rating.

287
00:35:42.240 –> 00:35:49.970
Richard Goins: There are crashes that have been in there for 5 years that are not affecting a carrier’s rating. So that sounds accurate to me. Okay.

288
00:35:50.090 –> 00:36:01.499
Steve Kessler: great. That’s good. We got a little clarity there. Here’s another question. Says we were charged with an accident in which our driver vehicle was not involved.

289
00:36:01.720 –> 00:36:10.189
Steve Kessler: There was clear video evidence that was provided, but never received a clear answer as to why we were charged.

290
00:36:11.890 –> 00:36:16.620
Richard Goins: so if it is still in the carriers SMS profile.

291
00:36:17.640 –> 00:36:20.890
Richard Goins: I would submitted

292
00:36:21.310 –> 00:36:31.819
Richard Goins: immediately. If if you want there. This is something that’s really common within this. It’s one of the common errors within the system is that the wrong carrier is cited.

293
00:36:32.600 –> 00:36:38.600
Richard Goins: and there’s a lot of reasons I won’t. It’s a deep can of worms there. There’s a lot of reasons that happens.

294
00:36:38.750 –> 00:36:46.260
Richard Goins: and it’s not incompetence. It’s more like fat fingered keyboard.

295
00:36:47.350 –> 00:36:48.390
Richard Goins: but

296
00:36:49.580 –> 00:37:00.289
Richard Goins: it’s it’s always a good idea to get a hold of the State agency that was involved in the crash. Investigation. If there was a crash investigation.

297
00:37:00.370 –> 00:37:03.870
Richard Goins: Whoever the crash was reported to contact them.

298
00:37:03.880 –> 00:37:13.850
Richard Goins: document the contact that you had with them and go go back to the crash preventability program and apply under it wasn’t us, basically.

299
00:37:15.700 –> 00:37:27.750
Steve Kessler: Okay, let’s see, we got several more questions popping in here. why are there such limited options when trying to submit a DataQ about an accident.

300
00:37:29.980 –> 00:37:35.910
Richard Goins: Well, I’d say the crash preventability people who develop that program.

301
00:37:36.780 –> 00:37:39.619
Richard Goins: We’re hesitant about doing it in the first place.

302
00:37:39.700 –> 00:37:54.660
Richard Goins: So what they did is they set up crashes that they believe are not preventable whatsoever, and just used those crashes.

303
00:37:54.840 –> 00:37:58.809
Richard Goins: And it’s important when you’re looking at the crashes, to not think about it as

304
00:37:59.140 –> 00:38:02.190
Richard Goins: them faulting the carrier for the crash.

305
00:38:02.450 –> 00:38:07.229
Richard Goins: What they’re doing is they’re documenting that the carrier was involved in a crash.

306
00:38:07.490 –> 00:38:10.060
Richard Goins: That’s it’s it’s not like a ticket.

307
00:38:10.160 –> 00:38:16.500
Richard Goins: It is simply that they’re documenting what that carrier did in that 5 year period.

308
00:38:16.650 –> 00:38:28.710
Richard Goins: And oftentimes it’s definitely not the carrier’s fault. but that’s how the Part 385 with the Federal Motor Carrier Safety regulations

309
00:38:28.800 –> 00:38:35.169
Richard Goins: issues points as if the carrier, if one carrier has a hundred crashes in a 5 year period

310
00:38:35.260 –> 00:38:37.699
Richard Goins: and another carrier has 10.

311
00:38:37.780 –> 00:38:48.759
Richard Goins: Obviously there’s something going on there now they’re not writing citations. There’s no monetary fines. If a compliance review is done, there is not a

312
00:38:48.830 –> 00:38:59.619
Richard Goins: site within the review to penalize a company for the crash. It’s simply a measure of what’s happening within the company. Does that make sense?

313
00:39:00.470 –> 00:39:03.559
Steve Kessler: Yeah, I think it does absolutely.

314
00:39:04.070 –> 00:39:09.069
Steve Kessler: Well, there, there are lots of questions coming in. Let’s

315
00:39:09.910 –> 00:39:22.549
Steve Kessler: whoops. So here’s another question. This comes from Scott, says New York is known for giving seatbelt violations when they are being warned.

316
00:39:22.710 –> 00:39:28.519
Steve Kessler: How do you recommend that we DataQ a he said, she said. Violation like this.

317
00:39:28.860 –> 00:39:35.440
Richard Goins: I don’t. If they put a warning. if they issued the driver a warning

318
00:39:36.060 –> 00:39:39.140
Richard Goins: and cited on the the inspection.

319
00:39:39.600 –> 00:39:53.349
Richard Goins: Then they they just chose to do an inspection at the same time, and documented the condition of the driver at the time of the stop. So what they’re doing there is, they’re choosing not to give the driver a monetary penalty.

320
00:39:53.960 –> 00:40:02.560
Richard Goins: and there’s nothing within the DataQ system that would allow for challenging a seat belt violation

321
00:40:02.850 –> 00:40:05.179
Richard Goins: when the driver also received a warning.

322
00:40:06.720 –> 00:40:07.670
Steve Kessler: Okay.

323
00:40:09.930 –> 00:40:13.870
Richard Goins: generally, I don’t like it when they give warnings

324
00:40:13.880 –> 00:40:17.980
Richard Goins: and violations because they’re really not connected.

325
00:40:19.000 –> 00:40:27.830
Richard Goins: It really shouldn’t, in my opinion, be part of the inspection process, because it creates this confusing

326
00:40:28.670 –> 00:40:29.900
Richard Goins: situation.

327
00:40:31.350 –> 00:40:32.250
Steve Kessler: Okay?

328
00:40:33.110 –> 00:40:45.009
Steve Kessler: Lena is asking how to DataQ the out of service for maintenance. If the driver was staying on the shoulder waiting for the road service to come

329
00:40:45.260 –> 00:40:53.589
Steve Kessler: when DLT officers were called by the local police and gave him a lot of hours of service violations for this.

330
00:40:54.000 –> 00:40:56.999
Steve Kessler: That’s questions. A little confusing.

331
00:40:58.610 –> 00:41:05.749
Richard Goins: just if you could talk in general about queue for hours of service.

332
00:41:07.330 –> 00:41:24.000
Richard Goins: A driver can be in violation of the hours of service unless they were operating in excess of them. So if, before the driver stopped, they were already in excess. The driver committed the violation, and it wasn’t that out of service violation.

333
00:41:24.240 –> 00:41:27.490
Richard Goins: I’d be happy to look at the inspection

334
00:41:27.700 –> 00:41:33.089
Richard Goins: and tell you what I think. But you, you wouldn’t want a DataQ

335
00:41:33.470 –> 00:41:46.119
Richard Goins: anything where you know the violation that occurred when an inspection took place. and whether or not a vehicle was broke down doesn’t really have anything to do with the truck inspection?

336
00:41:48.550 –> 00:41:49.360
Steve Kessler: Okay?

337
00:41:50.710 –> 00:41:53.870
Steve Kessler: next question.

338
00:41:53.960 –> 00:41:55.840
Steve Kessler: this comes from Bruce.

339
00:41:56.020 –> 00:42:02.900
Steve Kessler: Upon submitting a DataQ challenge are they not supposed to give it to a different officer.

340
00:42:03.060 –> 00:42:08.339
Steve Kessler: I had one in Missouri that they gave it back to the same officer twice.

341
00:42:08.580 –> 00:42:14.860
Steve Kessler: It was on an ABS Light on the trailer that was being pulled by a non-ABS truck

342
00:42:15.010 –> 00:42:26.200
Steve Kessler: manufactured before 90-97 officer maintained the trailer. Light was supposed to work period and refuse to look at the year model of the tractor.

343
00:42:29.730 –> 00:42:33.490
Richard Goins: Well, I’m what I’m curious about is if they actually

344
00:42:33.690 –> 00:42:37.690
Richard Goins: and I’m not disputing what you’re saying. But I’m wondering if it actually

345
00:42:37.890 –> 00:42:45.080
Richard Goins: was given to the that inspector to dispute, or they questioned that inspector twice

346
00:42:45.130 –> 00:42:50.039
Richard Goins: and just included their their email response.

347
00:42:50.300 –> 00:42:55.520
Richard Goins: Generally speaking, if they, if a DataQ is conducted

348
00:42:55.920 –> 00:43:00.050
Richard Goins: and no changes made, and you

349
00:43:00.240 –> 00:43:07.719
Richard Goins: submit the request again for somebody else to look at it. Either that individual who looked at it will look at it again, and

350
00:43:08.720 –> 00:43:11.809
Richard Goins: collaborate with another inspector

351
00:43:12.000 –> 00:43:12.930
Richard Goins: or

352
00:43:13.540 –> 00:43:16.960
Richard Goins: you know, analyst, or they will give it to another analyst.

353
00:43:17.080 –> 00:43:29.169
Richard Goins: but sometimes it might look like. They gave it to the same person. And it was just the officer who conducted the inspection who is responding an email to

354
00:43:29.270 –> 00:43:41.300
Richard Goins: the analysts question. So it that can be confusing if it’s going to the same person. I don’t like that. I don’t. I don’t think that’s a good thing. It’s one of the things that they’re reviewing right now.

355
00:43:41.510 –> 00:43:46.340
Richard Goins: And if you have something like that, I strongly suggest

356
00:43:46.380 –> 00:43:55.869
Richard Goins: that you get into the system they’re accepting. Public comments bring this kind of thing out. This is important because the DataQ system is flawed.

357
00:43:56.270 –> 00:43:57.310
Richard Goins: Very

358
00:43:57.440 –> 00:44:00.460
Richard Goins: but it is. It’s

359
00:44:00.680 –> 00:44:08.999
Richard Goins: it hasn’t been around for a really long time. So there’s gonna be things wrong with it. But I strongly suggest that you get in and

360
00:44:09.140 –> 00:44:13.419
Richard Goins: make a comment on it.

361
00:44:13.580 –> 00:44:25.390
Richard Goins: You can contact Missouri State Patrol and asked to talk to a captain and I’m certain that they would be happy to talk to you about it and present it to them. But

362
00:44:26.020 –> 00:44:35.899
Richard Goins: I don’t think that. I don’t know if I think that that’s 1 point and if you don’t deserve it. You don’t deserve it, but it is.

363
00:44:36.430 –> 00:44:38.360
Richard Goins: and sometimes you want to weigh

364
00:44:38.560 –> 00:44:44.129
Richard Goins: the effort versus, you know, reward

365
00:44:45.600 –> 00:44:54.579
Steve Kessler: that makes sense. Alan’s asking if a driver receives a violation and then quits, can the violation be DataQ?

366
00:44:55.050 –> 00:44:55.860
Richard Goins: Nope.

367
00:44:57.110 –> 00:44:59.439
Steve Kessler: Simple. Answer to that one?

368
00:44:59.850 –> 00:45:05.199
Richard Goins: Well, it. The thing is is that the driver, if the driver did something wrong.

369
00:45:06.130 –> 00:45:08.480
Richard Goins: and it was documented at the time.

370
00:45:08.640 –> 00:45:14.820
Richard Goins: That is the condition of that truck and that driver at that time. So

371
00:45:15.390 –> 00:45:22.810
Richard Goins: whether they, whether you terminate the driver for it, or you find them for it, or whatever you do to the driver. It doesn’t change that moment in time.

372
00:45:23.930 –> 00:45:29.330
Steve Kessler: So you could. If it’s on the motor carrier’s record, then it could be DataQ. Yes.

373
00:45:29.920 –> 00:45:36.879
Richard Goins: no, it’s it’s still, it’s it’s still belongs to the motor carrier because the driver was working for the motor carrier at that time.

374
00:45:37.650 –> 00:45:40.600
Steve Kessler: You’re saying the driver couldn’t DataQ it.

375
00:45:41.300 –> 00:45:46.839
Richard Goins: Well, I’m saying nobody could. Well, you could. I just don’t. I don’t believe it would get anywhere.

376
00:45:47.220 –> 00:45:48.910
Steve Kessler: Okay. Alright.

377
00:45:49.760 –> 00:45:59.430
Steve Kessler: here’s another question. Do State laws come before FMC regulations at certain States.

378
00:45:59.610 –> 00:46:17.889
Steve Kessler: I received an answer from the officer from Pennsylvania. That annual periodic inspection decals are not valid, and Pennsylvania State inspection detail is required. The driver had forms, but decals were washed off.

379
00:46:19.600 –> 00:46:25.469
Steve Kessler: Do state laws come before us from FMC regulations and in certain States?

380
00:46:25.860 –> 00:46:26.760
Richard Goins: So

381
00:46:26.950 –> 00:46:31.950
Richard Goins: what the regulations basically say in on some things

382
00:46:31.990 –> 00:46:39.550
Richard Goins: is that once a State adopts the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, whether they choose not to adopt one portion or not?

383
00:46:39.930 –> 00:46:47.230
Richard Goins: they can write the violation under Part 392 local laws.

384
00:46:47.240 –> 00:46:58.630
Richard Goins: So if it was written under that it probably could not rewritten under the 396.17 violation. because that very well specifies annual

385
00:46:59.030 –> 00:47:03.530
Richard Goins: but, for instance, California, I believe there’s this quarterly

386
00:47:03.550 –> 00:47:22.449
Richard Goins: I just recently found this out with Pennsylvania, and I was trying to help out a carrier with it, and I couldn’t get any response from Pennsylvania at all. But I do know that they can make laws that go above and beyond. And what you wanna do is when you look at the truck inspection under the site.

387
00:47:22.480 –> 00:47:28.040
Richard Goins: it will either say for this particular violation, it’ll either say 396.17,

388
00:47:28.670 –> 00:47:34.790
Richard Goins: and that will be the annual inspection or periodic is what the regulation state

389
00:47:35.040 –> 00:47:36.779
Richard Goins: but it is an annual.

390
00:47:36.890 –> 00:47:46.259
Richard Goins: or, it will say, 392 local laws, and they’ll give, you know, 392.77 one, or whatever it is and it will cite the State

391
00:47:46.330 –> 00:47:48.850
Richard Goins: regulation. So

392
00:47:49.220 –> 00:47:57.750
Richard Goins: it does. What they’re doing is they’re adding a violation that doesn’t occur within the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations.

393
00:48:01.230 –> 00:48:02.010
Steve Kessler: Okay.

394
00:48:03.800 –> 00:48:14.820
Steve Kessler: I need to make quick announcement here, folks, we have a lot of questions here, and we generally try to keep our program in under an hour.

395
00:48:14.940 –> 00:48:29.330
Steve Kessler: So I’m gonna keep going until we reach right at 3 0’clock, and then we we have record of all of your questions here, and we’ll try to sort those out and get them to the right people to get some of your questions answered

396
00:48:29.350 –> 00:48:38.670
Steve Kessler: but I knew we’d have a lot of questions here. But we have. I’m still looking at 25 or 26 of them here that I haven’t even asked.

397
00:48:38.750 –> 00:48:44.479
Steve Kessler: So we’re gonna do the best we can. to get through as many of these as we can.

398
00:48:44.930 –> 00:48:54.409
Steve Kessler: Here’s a question from Christian, considering the ongoing, or at least a start of reform.

399
00:48:54.600 –> 00:49:00.460
Steve Kessler: What changes do you foresee to be done to the DataQ system? That’s a good question.

400
00:49:00.720 –> 00:49:10.320
Richard Goins: I just made my public comment this morning on it. And I had read what the proposed a

401
00:49:10.770 –> 00:49:15.989
Richard Goins: rule was, and I suggested that they have a

402
00:49:16.380 –> 00:49:18.060
Richard Goins: independent board

403
00:49:18.140 –> 00:49:24.419
Richard Goins: conduct this rather than the individual states. And that’s very much what they’re looking at, doing

404
00:49:24.610 –> 00:49:30.110
Richard Goins: for DataQs that have been denied the first 2 times.

405
00:49:30.150 –> 00:49:38.390
Richard Goins: and that’s the biggest change that I think is going to happen. I applaud it. I really hope they don’t back off on it because

406
00:49:38.440 –> 00:49:41.469
Richard Goins: I won’t say to which States, but I know

407
00:49:41.500 –> 00:49:45.970
Richard Goins: some States. The data cue goes to the inspector who conducted the inspection.

408
00:49:47.280 –> 00:49:48.530
Richard Goins: and

409
00:49:48.740 –> 00:49:51.530
I believe that some inspectors

410
00:49:52.050 –> 00:49:55.570
Richard Goins: sunglasses have the mirrors on the inside. So

411
00:49:58.320 –> 00:50:03.360
Richard Goins: okay, I’m hoping they do that independent review board.

412
00:50:04.550 –> 00:50:06.609
Steve Kessler: So it’s important to

413
00:50:06.660 –> 00:50:11.870
Steve Kessler: make your voice heard. And you know, make some comments. Otherwise.

414
00:50:12.120 –> 00:50:19.810
Steve Kessler: we have to help change this. If there are problems with it, it’s gonna be up to us in the industry to do something about it.

415
00:50:19.870 –> 00:50:24.270
Richard Goins: I plead with everybody listening to this to make a public comment.

416
00:50:25.690 –> 00:50:34.879
Steve Kessler: Yeah, we can’t expect change if they don’t hear from you and know what your problems are. Eric’s asking is 4 months waiting on a determination

417
00:50:34.890 –> 00:50:39.990
Steve Kessler: for a crash preventability to make a decision a common time period.

418
00:50:40.800 –> 00:50:45.010
Richard Goins: I’m sorry to say I think it is. I think they’re about far behind.

419
00:50:45.940 –> 00:50:54.220
Richard Goins: It’s not good. but yeah, I think that’s not out of the realm of possibility. It’s the longest I’ve ever heard.

420
00:50:54.620 –> 00:50:57.370
Richard Goins: But I’ve heard 98 days.

421
00:51:00.660 –> 00:51:05.199
Steve Kessler: Okay, let’s see, we got another question here

422
00:51:05.280 –> 00:51:19.199
Steve Kessler: says when challenging crash data, what is best practice to present the crash to be considered non-preventable. I recently had a crash which is in this category due to a deer strike.

423
00:51:22.970 –> 00:51:24.220
Well, if you have

424
00:51:24.850 –> 00:51:33.799
Richard Goins: well, I think it should just be remote, should just be considered non preventable. But if if you have evidence of the deer strike

425
00:51:33.900 –> 00:51:35.900
Richard Goins: whether you have photos?

426
00:51:36.120 –> 00:51:42.370
Richard Goins: If you have an accident report. If there was an officer on scene and they say, did it stated anything.

427
00:51:42.500 –> 00:51:46.400
Richard Goins: Oh. I would simply just include the evidence.

428
00:51:46.480 –> 00:51:48.520
Richard Goins: Choose that

429
00:51:49.110 –> 00:51:57.479
Richard Goins: scenario when you’re conducting the DataQ on the crash and submit all of that evidence.

430
00:51:58.010 –> 00:52:04.239
Richard Goins: It’s gonna take a little while, but I would. I can’t imagine them not removing any gear strike.

431
00:52:04.490 –> 00:52:14.410
Steve Kessler: Yeah, here’s somebody, Holly responded. Says I’ve submitted a request, showing hair in the grill, so I guess that would be the hair from the deer.

432
00:52:15.120 –> 00:52:23.720
Richard Goins: I would, if well, I’ve never done them with crash, because I work for State Agency, but if I were doing that, I would consider that

433
00:52:24.540 –> 00:52:27.449
Richard Goins: better evidence than just hearsay.

434
00:52:29.750 –> 00:52:30.760
Steve Kessler: Alright.

435
00:52:34.800 –> 00:52:47.869
Steve Kessler: Another question from Michael says, when you request the DataQ you get your response. You are told that CVSA needs to change the rule because the officer is following their guidelines.

436
00:52:47.940 –> 00:52:56.489
Steve Kessler: You contact. CVSA and they tell you they can’t get FMCSA review. This, but they agree with you. What do you do?

437
00:52:58.090 –> 00:53:01.350
Richard Goins: I would take every opportunity to make a public comment.

438
00:53:01.850 –> 00:53:04.029
Richard Goins: When there’s a proposed rule change.

439
00:53:04.180 –> 00:53:09.860
Richard Goins: make a public comment. Contact your state administrators office regularly

440
00:53:09.980 –> 00:53:12.080
Richard Goins: with these kinds of issues.

441
00:53:12.300 –> 00:53:14.940
Richard Goins: I

442
00:53:15.390 –> 00:53:19.980
Richard Goins: I know I’m rehashing the same thing. But this is how we change it.

443
00:53:22.280 –> 00:53:35.179
Steve Kessler: Okay, here’s another question, and we’re getting close to our timeframe here. Our driver got caught in crosswinds while driving, and tilted to its side, almost flipped.

444
00:53:35.260 –> 00:53:38.689
Steve Kessler: but not completely. Yet there was damage to the truck

445
00:53:38.810 –> 00:53:49.549
Steve Kessler: and was towed. But when the officer made its report. It registered points to our SMS. No ticket was given to the driver. Can we challenge it?

446
00:53:55.290 –> 00:54:04.810
Richard Goins: I would like to review that by itself. If you’ve got my email, I’d like to talk to you about it. You can challenge it.

447
00:54:05.000 –> 00:54:08.729
Richard Goins: But I’d I’d want more information before I

448
00:54:09.290 –> 00:54:10.739
Richard Goins: responded to that.

449
00:54:12.060 –> 00:54:15.929
Steve Kessler: Yeah, I put, I just put the email up here on the screen

450
00:54:16.060 –> 00:54:19.549
Steve Kessler: few more minutes. It says,

451
00:54:20.760 –> 00:54:29.209
Steve Kessler: once the 2 year timeframe expires and it falls off the carriers MC does the safety score go up?

452
00:54:30.070 –> 00:54:32.200
Richard Goins: Yes, heard improves.

453
00:54:33.240 –> 00:54:37.280
Richard Goins: It should affect the inspection selection score

454
00:54:37.490 –> 00:54:39.540
Richard Goins: and

455
00:54:40.060 –> 00:54:43.229
Richard Goins: any other thing adjudicated within your SMS profile.

456
00:54:45.690 –> 00:54:51.399
Richard Goins: and it will lower your if it was not a service violation, it should also lower your out of service rate.

457
00:54:53.250 –> 00:54:54.000
Steve Kessler: Okay?

458
00:54:54.470 –> 00:54:59.270
Steve Kessler: Here’s another question. Can an officer cite a company

459
00:54:59.340 –> 00:55:07.049
Steve Kessler: because of refur temperature fluctuation when the bill of lading has a specific temperature

460
00:55:11.340 –> 00:55:16.729
unless it’s a hazardous material. I don’t see. I don’t know of anything within the regulations

461
00:55:16.840 –> 00:55:22.589
Richard Goins: that provides that kind of authority, and I would want to see the exact regulation that they cited.

462
00:55:22.750 –> 00:55:27.229
Richard Goins: If they recited if they cited something like

463
00:55:28.230 –> 00:55:38.389
Richard Goins: For instance, there’s a 396 violation that says that has to do with save operation. If they use something that covers a bunch of area that isn’t specific.

464
00:55:38.570 –> 00:55:40.780
Richard Goins: I would definitely dispute that.

465
00:55:43.540 –> 00:55:57.270
Steve Kessler: Okay, great. Here’s a another question. when an investigation is done. There’s generally 2 parts. There’s the report, and also the notes

466
00:55:57.280 –> 00:55:58.940
Steve Kessler: from the officer.

467
00:55:59.030 –> 00:56:03.050
Steve Kessler: What do I do if I don’t get the notes

468
00:56:04.060 –> 00:56:05.420
Steve Kessler: or a?

469
00:56:05.530 –> 00:56:09.199
Richard Goins: Generally speaking, if you’re if you’re referring to a truck inspection.

470
00:56:09.390 –> 00:56:14.510
Richard Goins: the notes, they’re likely not going to provide them to you.

471
00:56:14.560 –> 00:56:18.379
Richard Goins: or they’ll be resistant to do so unless you file a FOIA request.

472
00:56:19.130 –> 00:56:22.409
Steve Kessler: So you’d have to use a FOIA request in order to get those.

473
00:56:23.100 –> 00:56:24.210
Richard Goins: Absolutely.

474
00:56:24.780 –> 00:56:37.389
Richard Goins: That’s interesting. Okay, within the regulations. And within 385, I have not seen anything that says that they have to provide those notes. I used to believe that they did have to.

475
00:56:37.630 –> 00:56:42.250
Richard Goins: I looked it up, and the regulation that I was reviewing.

476
00:56:43.550 –> 00:56:54.349
Richard Goins: I mean ultimately, if you want them, you can get them. But you’re gonna have. Unfortunately. they’re gonna make you follow that route.

477
00:56:56.560 –> 00:56:58.220
Steve Kessler: Okay? Alright.

478
00:56:58.720 –> 00:57:00.450
Steve Kessler: Let’s see

479
00:57:01.220 –> 00:57:08.140
Steve Kessler: somebody asked, how do you request the notes? Is there? You’ve you’ve said a couple of times here about

480
00:57:08.260 –> 00:57:09.330
Steve Kessler: a

481
00:57:09.830 –> 00:57:13.339
Steve Kessler: commenting is, where do they go to do that

482
00:57:13.410 –> 00:57:17.550
Steve Kessler: is that one of is that this Richard?

483
00:57:17.990 –> 00:57:22.760
Richard Goins: So yeah. So within within a truck inspection at the end of the inspection

484
00:57:22.880 –> 00:57:35.840
Richard Goins: within the electronic database that they use, which is called ASPEN. There is a section for officer notes. and generally, unless the officer clicks the button that says, print notes, you won’t see? Em.

485
00:57:36.000 –> 00:57:45.659
Steve Kessler: okay? And where would a person go to? Make comments like we’ve talked about for the DataQ system.

486
00:57:45.700 –> 00:57:51.840
Richard Goins: Is there a website? What you want to do is go directly to the FMCSA,

487
00:57:52.380 –> 00:57:53.620
Richard Goins: website.

488
00:57:53.850 –> 00:58:02.100
Richard Goins: And if you just Google FMCSA public comments, it’s gonna bring up whatever current rulemaking they’re discussing.

489
00:58:02.700 –> 00:58:14.729
Richard Goins: and it will take you to an area where there’ll be a a hyperlink. You can click on that hyperlink if you don’t see any rules that are are assigned to

490
00:58:15.180 –> 00:58:22.629
Richard Goins: the issue. You wanna talk about I would email, the State Administrators office and those

491
00:58:22.900 –> 00:58:25.780
Richard Goins: email addresses are all right

492
00:58:25.940 –> 00:58:36.080
Richard Goins: within the Federal system. You can. Google, Minnesota Dot or Minnesota FMCSA State Administrator’s office. And you’ll get

493
00:58:36.360 –> 00:58:39.870
Richard Goins: the Fmca. Say, Administrator’s email there

494
00:58:41.150 –> 00:58:42.930
Steve Kessler: fantastic.

495
00:58:43.670 –> 00:58:53.330
Steve Kessler: I gotta. I gotta tell you, Richard. There’s a lot of good information, and I’m sure if we run for another 2 – 3 hours there’d be this many more questions.

496
00:58:53.490 –> 00:58:56.229
Steve Kessler: Maybe we could go back and do it again.

497
00:58:56.350 –> 00:59:01.849
Steve Kessler: Well, I think maybe what I may do is just set this up as a

498
00:59:01.920 –> 00:59:07.260
Steve Kessler: a panel discussion. And let people ask the experts about DataQ questions.

499
00:59:07.480 –> 00:59:13.139
Richard Goins: Let people ask questions.

500
00:59:13.410 –> 00:59:35.050
Steve Kessler: That’s great. So one thing I do wanna mention, I think in a lot of cases a lot of the things here we’ve talked to talked about, Richard. You know, having some training available for your drivers on. You know how to conduct and what to do when they are being expected, or certainly at scene of an accident.

501
00:59:35.740 –> 01:00:05.700
Steve Kessler: and training those people in your company that are responsible to do these DataQs to get as much knowledge as you possibly can. And having said that a lot of you probably know that we provide a learning management system that could help you make that training possible. And I was just gonna throw this out here, if any of you would like for us to provide you with a little demo of our service.

502
01:00:05.750 –> 01:00:16.510
Steve Kessler: We would be happy to do that and help you out. So Richard. Great information. Thank you so much

503
01:00:16.700 –> 01:00:32.560
Steve Kessler: sadly we’re running out of time here, but I really appreciate your input. And I am going to get back with you and see if we can put together a a panel of people to have a really good discussion and get a lot of folks questions answered.

504
01:00:33.000 –> 01:00:34.010
Richard Goins: Sounds good.

505
01:00:34.270 –> 01:00:38.069
Steve Kessler: Appreciate it very much. Thank you all very much for joining us.

506
01:00:38.090 –> 01:00:48.990
Steve Kessler: We hope that you can join us again. on our next webinar. By the way, I want you to write this one day down on November the seventh.

507
01:00:49.120 –> 01:00:55.720
Steve Kessler: I believe it’s at 2 pm. And you all get invitations. We’re gonna have Rebecca Brewster

508
01:00:55.770 –> 01:01:21.309
Steve Kessler: from ATRI is gonna present the top 10 industry issues which were just recently presented at the ATA MCE conference. So look for that that invitation, and I hope that you can join us on a next webinar. Richard. Thank you, sir. Appreciate it, and everybody be safe out there. Thank you all for joining us.

509
01:01:21.430 –> 01:01:22.499
Richard Goins: Have a good day.

510
01:01:22.620 –> 01:01:23.689
Steve Kessler: Thank you.