The Magical 8,000 Pounds

Published May 18, 2013

There’s magic numbers in truck law. Illinois used to have the magical 73,280. There’s also the magical 54,999 which is an integer short of the federal heavy vehicle use tax. The most magical number of all is 26,000, but that’s an article for another day. This week, the magical 8,000 found in the Illinois Vehicle Code is discussed. As will be seen, it is commonly a problematic magic number. The problem occurs most often when a truck owner or a police officer does not fully understand the regulations of an 8,000 pound truck plate – and there are many.

A concept to understand is that properly registering a vehicle is the responsibility of the owner. The Secretary of State does not inspect vehicles at the point of sale to make sure the correct registration is purchased. There are dozens upon dozens of different types of license plates available to vehicle owners in Illinois. The Secretary of State simply reviews the application on its face and assumes the information listed is true and correct. If everything is in order, a fee (or tax) is assessed and the registration is issued.

The law requires that all second division vehicles (trucks/trailers/buses) be registered, and the registered weight must cover the weight of the vehicle plus the load. This is found in 625 ILCS 5/3-401D. As stated above, there are many different kinds of registration available to owners of second division vehicles, however the most common found on trucks in Illinois are regular flat weight plates with a letter designation. The list of these plates are found in 625 ILCS 5/3-815.

Here’s the rub. Occasionally a small truck or van (some of which are second division vehicles, some are not) are out on the street operating on passenger plates instead of B-truck plates (8,000 pounds). It does not take long for the alert police officer to make a stop. The driver quickly blames the SOS for the error, but as stated above, the responsibility truly lies with the registrant. Shame on truck driver.

Two wrongs do not make a right, but time after time a truck enforcement officer will size up this situation as this:

“The truck, by law, requires weighted registration, and since it has none it is therefore overweight.”

The police officer will subsequently weigh the truck and issue an overweight on registration citation. Or maybe he doesn’t weigh the truck and writes an overweight ticket based on the manufacturers GVWR. Even worse, maybe he wrongly assumes since the vehicle does not have appropriate registration, it is not entitled to be on the road, therefore is overweight on gross under 625 ILCS 5/15-111(a) and writes that citation. Each example described is wholly wrong, and each example gets progressively more ridiculous in understanding. Shame on the police officer.

So is it wrong for the small truck or van to be operating on passenger plates if it is a second division vehicle? Yes. Then what are the police to do if they are not to write an overweight ticket? Well, for starters, the police officer could simply inform the driver of the error and instruct him to visit the local SOS officer and pay a $29 fee to have the plate reclassified. This would be the most reasonable route.

However, if a police officer must issue a citation, because by golly a law has been broken, the only enforcement avenue is under 625 ILCS 5/3-703 for improper use of registration, a Class-C misdemeanor. This is punishable by a $1500 fine and 30 days in jail…one heck of a penalty for misclassification of the smallest truck plate available in Illinois.

But wait! What if the truck is really loaded down? If the truck had been properly classified with a B-truck plate, it would be over 8,000 pounds and an overweight on registration citation could be issued! Correct…here is the answer. Give the driver credit for 8,000 pounds just like a B-truck plate. Why? Because the cost of a B-truck plate is $101 and the cost of a passenger plate is $101. At the end of the day, the registrant paid the right amount of money…he just got the wrong product in the check-out aisle. As mentioned before, registration is a tax to operate vehicles on the road, and the owner paid the tax.

Further, Illinois is the midwest king of specialty registration like firefighter, sports teams and university plates. These are permissible on second division vehicles up to 8,000 pounds as well. Sorry coppers, no overweight on registration.

A Mile of Trouble

Published May 11, 2013

“Walk a mile in their shoes.” “Mile after magnificent mile.” “Give ‘em an inch, they take a mile.” “Always go the extra mile.” “My mind is racing a mile a minute.” Is there are common thread developing? Every truck officer in Illinois worth his salt has heard a trucker say “but don’t I get a mile off the state highway?”. Well, sometimes you do, sometimes you don’t. The problem isn’t whether the driver is entitled to a mile of reasonable access, the problem is why he thinks he is entitled. An even bigger and more expensive problem is when a driver is hauling an oversize/overweight permit load, and his 1-mile entitlement is based on poor advice from someone he beleives is an authority on the issue.

The mile of access being discussed in this article revolves around a special provision for vehicles travelling on state highways under the authority of an oversize/overweight (OSOW) issued by the Illinois Department of Transportation. In this instance, the OPER 993 provision sheet allows the permit load to go off the assigned permit route for one mile onto “another contiguous state highway”. The provision then states four reasons when this is acceptable.

This word study focuses on the phrase “contiguous state highway”. What this phrase means is that if the permit load is operating on state highway “X” (assigned) and turns onto state highway “Y” (unassigned), the driver is legal as long as he only drives one mile for one of the four reasons. The “state highway” language is what is at stake. This provision does not allow the driver to go one mile onto a county, township, village or city highway.

In August 2011, a trucking magazine published by a national trucking association ran a legal piece on this Illinois provision. The magazine contracts with a law firm to answer truck law questions in a special section each issue. Here is their interpretation of this provision:

Let me read that provision to you again. “The assigned permit route includes a distance of one (1) mile onto another contiguous state jurisdiction highway …” Your permit only allows you to go up to 1 mile off route into a different state [emphasis added]. Your permit does not allow you to travel any distance off route in the same state where your permit was issued.

Really? This is sound legal advice? Per statute in 625 ILCS 5/15-301(a), IDOT cannot even give authority to operate OSOW onto a local road within Illinois! Yet somehow they can authorize a trucker to move OSOW for one mile into a “different state” because an uniformed attorney says so? I sure hope that law firm is paying the fine for the trucker who confidently crossed the border into another state from Illinois thinking he was on the level.

This is serious business. It presumed that Illinois probably has some of the highest fines for overweight vehicles, but that does not mean overweight fines are necessarily cheap in other states. And forget the fines. What a tragedy if the driver got stuck under an overpass, damaged a structure or was involved in a fatal crash. His best defense is “I was relying on legal advice promoted by a professional organization to which I am a member”. He will be eaten alive. And that article was read by thousands of truck drivers. Who knows how many relays of this information has been passed along via email or word of mouth. The bad advice horse is out of the bad advice barn and it ain’t coming back.

The goal here is not to pick on the authors for misinterpreting the law. They are probably a fine legal firm and do a lot of good for the industry, just as the association they write for is doing some pretty awesome work. The goal of the article is to expose the potential catastrophe deriving from an uninformed singular opinion.

By the time you have read this, this article has been vetted by a select group of police officers, trucker industry leaders, attorneys, and state regulatory officials. A plurality of leadership prevents topical issues from being taken out of context. Content may derive from a singular person, but without peer review and input from others, a singular opinion serves no purpose other than promote and expose bias on the part of the author.

Truck law is hard, complex, and voluminous. Be wary of those “leaders” who act and opine alone. While their good intentions and motives are commendable, there is a good chance they could very well be a mile off base.

Bathroom Scales

Published May 4, 2013

Let’s be honest…there is probably no greater divide between law enforcement and the trucking industry than the use of portable scales. Police officers will argue till they are blue in the face about portable scale accuracy and necessity. Truckers will argue till they are blue in the face that portable scales are inaccurate and nothing but a revenue tool. This article is not going to explore either of those arguments, but a different problem with wheel load weigher scales will be discussed…a problem that should offend every red-blooded Illinois taxpayer.

Here’s some facts about WLW scales in Illinois:

1. They are expensive to buy. The most common scale is the PAT SAW-10 manufactured by International Road Dynamics. Since there is only one authorized retailer in Illinois, cost for one new scale floats around $4,000. The second most popular brand is Intercomp, and they cost in the $3500 range.

2. They are expensive to re-certify. The Illinois Department of Agriculture has regulatory authority governing weights and measures, and therefore they have sole statutory authority to re-certify scales every 12 months. If it passes, $200. If it fails, $200. If it passes the second time around, $200. If it does not have an $3.00 integrity seal, $200. No one can get around those charges.

3. Re-certification is limited. There are 3 ways for law enforcement to have their scales re-certified. Option #1 – drive them to the IDOA in Springfield at the state fairgrounds, and eat the cost of fuel, meals, miles, a day’s wages and lost productivity. Option #2 – have the ITEA do all that for free. Option #3, pay an extra $160 per scale to have a private scale company transport them to their shop and have IDOA come re-certify them at their shop (with a re-certification “guarantee”…see below).

With nearly 400 portable WLW scales in Illinois owned by local counties and municipalities, that is a lot of time and money spent on re-certification. Contrary to popular belief, the vast majority of local governments in Illinois have slashed their budgets, personnel and services. They are living lean and there is not a lot of discretionary cash.

Now go back to point #2 above. If a scale fails re-certification, the IDOA charges $200. Why do scales fail? The most common causes are lack or routine maintenance and abuse. The ITEA cannot police every officer and make sure they treat their scales with respect, but the ITEA can FOR SURE teach police officers how to maintain their scales.

Several members of the ITEA have been trained by International Road Dynamics on how to perform annual routine maintenance of PAT SAW-10 portable WLW scales. Armed with that knowledge, the ITEA is hosting training on June 12th to teach any owner of PAT SAW-10 scales how to maintain their scales. For too long, police officers have been told all they can really do is change the batteries. This is wholly incorrect.

Scales are sensitive instruments that need care. When they are not cared for, they fail, and repairs are expensive. If the parts and labor costs are not enough, the cost to have each scale transported ($160) to the only dealer in Illinois for repairs is. Add both of these to the mandatory cost of re-certification ($200) and possibly a new integrity seal ($200), and one scale needing to be fixed can easily eclipse $600. Almost all of these repairs (and associated costs) can be avoided by simple routine maintenance and a free trip from the ITEA to Springfield.

It’s the old “ounce of prevention or pound of cure” argument. The ITEA believes in an ounce of prevention, but to save a pound of taxpayer money. So if the argument is “pay the extra $160 because a private scale company guarantees certification”, realize you can pretty guarantee it yourself without paying the extra cost.

Over the last two years the ITEA has transported hundreds of scales to Springfield for certification, and guess how many have failed…two. Why? Because of problems that could have been corrected by easy routine maintenance. Maintenance training the ITEA is providing to save you money.

If you own PAT SAW-10 WLW scales, sign-up for our class online now. IF you own any brand of portable scales, sign-up to have us transport them to Springfield for no cost.

Cement Mixers – Week 2

Published April 27, 2013

Cement is simple. Mix a few aggregates and water, load and spin in a truck, pour out on a jobsite, and then leave to harden like rock. But mixer law is not always so simple. Last week this blog spent time discussing the weight exceptions afforded cement mixers in Illinois. But that is not the end of unique laws that pertain to cement mixers. Cement mixers also have some unique aspects of their configuration that most trucks don’t have and it changes the method that police use when weighing them. Cement mixers also have an extra provision in how much grace weight they receive before the load must be legalized.

It is hard to find a 4 or 5-axle cement mixer in Illinois that does not have a pneumatic axle which raises or lowers through a mechanical process. Most 4-axles mixers have a trailing axle on the rear of the vehicle that lifts when the truck is empty as the extra axle is not needed to cover the weight. Many 5-axle mixers have either a trailing axle or an intermediate axle, or both.

What makes this important is the method police officers use when weighing the mixer. Adjustable axles are meant to self-regulate based on the PSI (pounds per square inch) set by the operator. The goal is for the truck to keep balanced weight between the axles at all times. Because of this, when a truck goes over bumps, rail crossings or curbs, the weight equalizes between the axles keeping the truck upright.

Unfortunately a rumor has circulated in the truck enforcement community for years that cement mixers cannot be weighed on portable scales. This is untrue, but if a police officer weighs a mixer on portables, all axles must be level. This is accomplished by the use of extra scales or equal height dummy pads. The police officer should note the PSI of the pneumatic axles at the time of stop, and the air gauge needs to return to that setting for each weight taken. If neither of these things are done, then the weighing is inaccurate.

Remember last week when you learned that cement mixers registered as a Special Hauling Vehicle (SHV), with a tandem spread out between 72” to 96”, receives 36,000 pounds on the tandem instead of the typical 34,000 pounds? This special weight allowance applies to mixers of either the 3 or 4-axle variety…but the extra provisions don’t stop there!

Under 625 ILCS 5/15-112(b), any police officer who finds an overweight violation SHALL require the driver to reduce the weight of the load until it is legal. However, cement mixers described in the paragraph above are forgiven of this requirement up to 4,000 pounds overweight. The police officer may still write the overweight citation if the axle or gross weight exceeds the statutory 2,000 pounds grace weight, but he must issue the citation and release the vehicle if it is less than 4,000 pounds overweight on either axle or gross.

This is for good reason. A load of wet concrete is worth a lot of money to the customer. If the load is held and allowed to dry in the mixing drum, the entire drum is waste. The cost to replace the drum is extremely expensive. The General Assembly is not absolving the concrete industry of all responsibility, but they also recognize the economic impact the cement industry makes. The goal of this article is not to agree or disagree with this law, but to relay what the truth is.

Lastly, the assumption is that most cement mixers require a driver who holds a valid Commercial Driver’s License (CDL). Here’s the facts: a cement mixer is a tank. The “tank” in this instance holds a quantity of “liquid”. Most CDL vehicles with a tank similar in size to a cement mixer will require an “N” tanker endorsement. This is not true for cement mixers though. A CDL holder operating a cement mixer is NOT required to have a tanker endorsement while in that vehicle. Will you find this in the IVC? No. But the IVC has adopted and is bound by the CDL laws of the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Regulations, and that code lifts the tanker endorsement requirement for CDL’s.

…and for our card-carrying ITEA members, log into the discussion forum and take a free, online quiz to challenge your mixer legal understanding!

Cement Mixers – Week 1

Published April 20, 2013

Groundhog’s Day means nothing. Any seasoned truck enforcement officer recognizes that an increase of cement mixers on the street means the weather is starting to turn for the better. It’s not that cement can’t be poured in the cold, but warm weather is the ideal…who wants to float concrete in the January? Cement mixers also signal the start of the construction industry and hopefully 2013 will be a good year. The economy needs it. So as the birds begin chirping and the cement mixers start spinning, it is time to talk about laws specific to those vehicles.

The first thing to understand is that concrete is the foundation (pun intended) of the construction industry. Because of that, concrete industry has a strong lobby in Springfield. And because the industry has a strong lobby, they have a lot of exceptions to the law. And because they have a lot of exceptions, there is inherently confusion.

In Illinois, the most common configuration is the 4-axle mixer, either front or rear discharge. There are fleets which run 3 or 5-axle mixers as well, but they are for sure in the minority compared to the sheer quantity of 4-axle mixers. At this time, the 4-axle mixers are the only configuration which receives any special weight exemptions.

The ITEA heavily promotes a policy that overweight violations in Chapter 15 of the Illinois Vehicle Code are mutually exclusive from overweight violations in Chapter 3 of the IVC. But in all things truck law, there are exceptions. Typically, any 4-axle truck is limited to the maximum weights listed in Chapter 15 like any other truck. However, when the owner of the truck pays an extra $125 with the registration to be a Special Hauling Vehicle (SHV), those weights change.

As it pertains to cement mixers, single axle and tandem axle weights remain the same (20,000 and 34,000 respectively), and the entire gross weight from axles 1-4 are still subject to the federal bridge formula. The SHV permit protects the mixer from the police using the federal bridge formula to find an overweight violation from any group of 3-axles, whether from axles 1-3 or from axles 2-4. It is those groups of axles where cement mixers commonly exceed legal weights.

The SHV also allows a cement mixer with a tandem spread between six feet (72”) and eight feet (96”) to be allowed 36,000 pounds instead of the maximum 34,000 pounds for tandems. All these special exemptions are predicated on the fact that the mixer is carrying wet concrete in the plastic state. Not sand, not water. Also, these exemptions are not extended to the truck when operated on defense highways (interstates and toll roads) in Illinois.

The confusion arises when a 3-axle mixer or a 5-axle mixer is stopped by the police. Even if one of these vehicles is registered with an SHV, there are no special weight exemptions. If a 5-axle mixer is operating with 4-axles on the ground, then the SHV applies. If a 4-axle mixer with an SHV is only operating with 3-axles on the ground, then the SHV does not apply. How many physical axles are attached to the truck is not the question that needs to be answered. How many axles are on the ground is the criterion used to determine whether or not the SHV, and all the special weight exemptions, are in play.

Don’t get too comfortable in your understanding of this law yet. The Illinois General Assembly is considering a bill (HB2361) to allow some weight exemptions for 3-axle mixers registered as an SHV. The ITEA will keep you posted if and when this bill is ratified.

Next week, this blog will look at the proper methods for weighing a cement mixer, weight tolerances and what licenses are need to operate them.

From the Mouths of Truckers

Published April 13, 2013

Everybody likes a list. Not everybody wants a list of things to do that make their life more difficult, but a neatly laid out list of tangible items makes things easy to understand. After nearly 31 years on the air and thousands of Top 10 lists later, David Letterman has proven this theory true. The ITEA surveyed some of our friends from member trucking companies to tell us why, from their perspective, it is stupid to run trucks overweight. The top five answers are on the board…out of the mouth of the truckers themselves.

Wear & Tear
No doubt trucks are built to do heavy things. Heavy is a relative term though. What is heavy for a grandma may not be heavy for a grandson. Some trucks are meant to do heavier work than others. When a truck is loaded beyond the capacity it is meant for, it compromises the integrity of the vehicle. The brakes, steering, suspension, frame and other critical parts are put at risk. Hopefully a crash will be avoided, but the repairs are going to cost more money in the long term than the short term benefits of running overweight.

Safety
As mentioned above, overweight vehicles are a safety problem. In 2009, there were 3,197 fatal crashes involving commercial motor vehicles resulting in 3,619 fatalities in the United States. In the same year there were 60,000 crashes that resulted in 93,000 injuries. If the loss of life and limb was not enough, the average cost per CMV crash in 2009 is estimated at $140,762! It is next to impossible to precisely tell how many of those are directly caused by overweight status, or indirectly from the wear and tear. The point is overweight trucks are unsafe.

Reputation
Ask any truck enforcement officer worth his salt which companies are notorious for running overweight. It is not hard to earn a reputation in this business for being the company that is constantly heavy. Don’t kid yourself…the cop doesn’t mind. You just made his job easy and made him look like a superstar. Word gets around quick in law enforcement circles and before you now it, truck cops will be pulling out on you every time.

Loss of Pay
Hey boss…do you pay your drivers to go to court on an overweight ticket or do you only pay him for the hours he is behind the wheel? Do you pay the overweight ticket for him if you loaded him heavy? What about your brokers? Do you load them heavy and hang them out to dry if they get caught? Sometimes the drivers are at fault for allowing their trucks to go heavy. But let’s be adults – sometimes we allow them to be heavy in an effort to save a buck, and then they lose even more wages answering for the ticket in court.

What about the money lost while the truck is stopped and weighed? What about the money lost while the truck is not working because the load needs to be legalized or the driver is being held until his bail can be posted? Are all those secondary costs really worth an extra ton or two?

Morale
There’s a bad apple in every job. There are doctors, lawyers, and unfortunately even cops doing deplorable things. Thankfully, those people are in the smallest minority in each of those professions. Follow this line of thinking: Most truckers are good people and want to do a good job. Good workers are given tools to do their job better, not put in positions to fail. Empowered workers develop pride and respect for their company which increase profits. Workers who are put in a position to fail will perform poorly, cost more money and return negligible profits.

Who do you want working for you? Workers with high morale or low morale? The size of your pocketbook depends on this. Read one of the hundreds of talking head books about organizational leadership…they all say the same thing – your profit and success as a company is directly dependent on the morale of your labor. No one wants to work diligently for management that does not care about them or the law.

Dumb Laws

Published April 6, 2013

“Hey! You wanna hear the most annoying sound in the world?” The answer is “no”…no you don’t. That would be dumb. You may very well consider the person who asked you the question to be dumb. You could even pose the question in a movie, and call the movie Dumb & Dumber. You might even think this blog is dumb. A day probably does not go by when you don’t have the opportunity to witness someone else doing something dumb. Sometimes laws are dumb too. They may have been passed with noble intent and good reason, but in the end they are just dumb. The article this week looks at one such law.

In the fall of 2010, the ITEA sat down with representatives from the Illinois Department of Transportation, the Illinois State Police, the Secretary of State, and Mid-west Truckers Association. The goal was to change some laws. In the end, several laws were re-written and signed into law by Gov. Quinn. The same group met again in 2011 with a few more groups like the Illinois Trucking Association and the Illinois Municipal League. A new bill never evolved from that meeting, but several so-called “dumb” laws were addressed, including the one at hand in this article.

Are safety lane inspections dumb? Absolutely not. Is enforcement of safety stickers dumb? Hardly. Are the penalties for being in violation of safety test laws dumb? Well, beauty is in the eye of the beholder. How dumb the penalty mandated for not having a safety test as required might be open to some debate as well.

Per 625 ILCS 5/13-111, if a person is convicted for not having a safety test as required, the penalty is a Class-C Misdemeanor. What does a Class-C misdemeanor actually mean? Great question! According to 625 ILCS 5/5-4.5-65, a person convicted of a Class-C misdemeanor may be incarcerated for up to 30 days in jail and fined up to $1500.

The question is this: does that maximum punishment fit the crime? Yes, unsafe trucks on the highways of this great state are unquestionably wrong. But look at the law surrounding safety tests. The number one phone call received by the ITEA is questions regarding safety tests…from police officers. The most downloaded resource document from the ITEA member database is the three-page safety test flow chart. Three weeks were spent on this very blog earlier this year discussing the nuances of safety tests, and the articles barely even scratched the surface.

The fact is the law is confusing for both the industry and law enforcement. Where there is confusion, there is error. Where there is error, should there be excessive penalties? The cost of an average safety lane test can range from $25-$50 based on the size of the vehicle and the number of axles, but a driver could theoretically go to jail and be fined $1500 for not getting it done it time? Most local police departments in Illinois have policies that misdemeanor arrests are custodial. The driver is handcuffed, booked at the station and assigned a state ID number. That’s quite a ride for not getting a $25 safety test done.

In reality, the ITEA has yet to see a documented case (although rumors swirl about) of any police officer actually making a custodial arrest of someone for not complying with this law, or fining them $1500. The majority of local police officers who cite a driver for this charge it under local ordinance and issue fines anywhere from $25 to $250. Discretion is always up for debate, but those ordinance fines are far more reasonable than what the state law prescribes.

So if the legislature has mandated a penalty that no police officer has any intention of enforcing, then maybe it’s time to change that law to make it what it should be, a petty offense. This is what was proposed in the aforementioned meeting in 2011. With Senate Bill 1294 starting to move through the statehouse, this would be a great time to make a common sense change. Without a change, the future reality is that maximum penalties will be sought.

A law is only as good as the enforcement of it. So if the means does not justify the end, then one could probably consider the penalty, well…dumb.

In memory of Trooper James Sauter

Published March 30, 2013

There is nothing that rattles the soul of a police officer quite like the disturbing news that one of their own has lost their life in the line of duty. It is a known risk all take when they sign up for the job, but the reality is everyone hopes and prays it is not them that has to pay the ultimate sacrifice.

With great sadness on Friday March 29th the Illinois law enforcement community learned the devastating news that Illinois State Trooper James Sauter was killed on I-294 after a collision with a semi-tractor trailer combination. The details of the event are unclear and unknown at this time, but what is clear is the pain his family must suffer while coping with the tragedy.

There are no earthly, temporal remedies to make this situation better. However, the law enforcement and trucking communities rallying together to financially support the family of Trooper Sauter will speak volumes. As this organization consciously straddles the divide between trucking and enforcement, it has become clear that the industry is highly supportive of police operations and has deep compassion for the dangers of the job.

It was after the tragic loss of ISP Trooper Deatherage in 2012 that the ITEA realized there was piece of the benevolence puzzle missing when a police officer loses his or her life in the line of duty. The shock and devastation felt by surviving family members and the victims agency leave little in the way of human resources to devote to logistical items like fundraising. It is apparent, however, that the first few days after the tragedy is when most people are most willing to open their hearts to contribute. Yet there are few avenues available to meet that end.

The ITEA will champion this cause until a formal memorial fund can be established by the family of Trooper Sauter. The ITEA will continue to stand in that gap for future Illinois police officers who pay the ultimate sacrifice. There are many localized benevolent groups doing great works in their communities and the ITEA applauds those efforts. But what happens when there is a tragedy that transcends local boundaries? Who is organizing those efforts? There is a need and the ITEA has the ability to meet that need. The ITEA will seize that opportunity to shoulder the weight of this task.

The amount of money is not what is important. It is not a financial problem we have. Americans are incredibly wealthy and resourced in comparison to the rest of the world. More importantly, we are a extremely generous people. Unfortunately there is a logistical problem in that people who want to contribute at the peak of their own sorrow and grief do not have an outlet. What is needed is a convenient and rapid way to mobilize charitable efforts for fallen officers within the first 12-24 hours from the time of the incident.

The ITEA has the infrastructure, resolve and dedicated people to make this happen. It was available after the loss of Trooper Deatherage, but the method to utilize it was still unclear. In response, the ITEA began the process of establishing the ITEA Foundation, a 501(c)(3) to answer this call. Unfortunately the death of Trooper Sauter came before that process was complete.

At the time of this publication, the ITEA has received $925 in addition to the $500 the ITEA seeded the initiative with. Thank you to those who have so generously given. Please keep the family of Trooper Sauter in your prayers.

Exemplary Police Work #3

Published March 23, 2013

When is it legal to do something illegal? When you have permission, of course. With every authority there are boundaries, and crossing them may have penalties. But, violating those rules does not necessarily mean all authority is nullified. For example, a driver’s license is a permission. You might lose your license for certain things, but not every traffic violation revokes a valid license. The article this week tells the story of just such an occasion involving an overweight permit load and the police officer who stopped it.

Once a permit is issued for an oversize or overweight (OS/OW) load, the truck can make its move. Inevitably, a police officer is going to stop it. Why? Because an OS/OW truck is breaking the law. The question the police officer needs answered is whether or not the vehicle has been issued a permit to cover the offense. In other words, it is now legal for the truck to be illegal?

When a police officer lawfully stops the vehicle and is presented a permit, the permit must be validated. There are three criterions to validate a permit. First, it must be operating between the effective and expiring dates/times. Second, it must be on the assigned route. Lastly, the permit must unequivocally belong to that truck, load, and owner. A piece a paper that just says “permit” on it doesn’t make it a valid permit!

Once the permit is validated, there are only two ways it can be voided, or in other words nullified…gone as if it never existed. One reason is if the load is divisible, and secondly if the permit is fraudulent. Each of these reason can (and will) be explored in much greater detail, but the point is there are only two ways to void a valid permit and knock the truck back to legal size and weight. That’s it…two.

There is an almost unending list of rules that go along with a valid permit. It’s not okay to break one of the rules, and there is a penalty for doing so, but it is not the same as voiding the permit. It’s a violation of the permit and enforceable under 625 ILCS 5/15-301(j).

Back in January of this year, there was a snowy day and an alert police officer (who just so happens to be a member of the ITEA) saw an OS/OW permit load rolling down the highway. The road was covered in snow so that the lane markings could not be seen. The police officer stopped the vehicle and obtained an IDOT permit from the driver. The officer quickly validated it…it was on route, between the effective/expiration dates, and it unequivocally belonged to the company, truck and load.

However, the OPER 993 provision sheet (rules for the permit) clearly stated that operation during inclement weather was a violation. The officer had the driver dead to rights. The enforcement mistake came when the officer voided the permit because of the inclement weather and knocked the truck back to legal weights. The ensuing bail for the overweight citation was nearly $4,000.00. He voided instead of violating the permit.

Here’s the point: the officer, and the driver both made a mistake. We’re all humans. The exemplary action by the officer that prompts the writing of this article can be summed up in one word – humility.

As it turns out, the trucking company is also a member of the ITEA. They called and asked about the citation. The ITEA in turn called the officer to see what happened. The officer realized his mistake and made it right. He could have amended the ticket to a violation of permit, but instead he chose to drop the whole thing in court.

In a win-at-all-costs profession like policework, it’s hard sometimes hard to find cases when a police officer readily admits an error and owns up to it. He could have had a big trial, subpoenaed expert witnesses from all over the midwest, and made a big to-do wasting everyone’s time and money. But instead he chose to humbly acknowledge his error and do the right thing.

That’s what being an ITEA truck officer is all about. That’s professionalism. We’re proud to call him one of our own.

Special Mobile Equipment – Week 2

Published March 16, 2013

There once was a man who owned a horse. He loved horses, but he equally loved the environment and refused to further decimate the good earth with a polluting modern automobile. The man rode the horse everywhere…to work, the grocery store and Chik-fil-A. He was a master rider, and had he been a little shorter, he probably would have been a jockey. One day a policeman stopped him (on the horse) and said he needed a driver’s license. Please, read on.

The next question out of your mouth should be “what in the world does equestrian transportation have to do with truck enforcement”? Last week this blog looked at special mobile equipment (SME) and the necessity for it to have registration. This week the article takes another look at special mobile equipment, but the focus is on the necessity of a driver’s license.

The answer to your question is this: SME, like horses, does not require a driver’s license to operate on the road because they are not “vehicles”. The problem is SME resembles a vehicle in the fact most have wheels and operate on the road. Many types of SME also have motors. From a generic, layman perspective SME should be considered a “vehicle”, but statutory definition does not give the same credence. To understand this is to follow a horsetrail through the Illinois Vehicle Code (IVC), so saddle up cowboy.

The easiest way around the driver’s license requirement is found in 6-102 where it lists which drivers are exempt from having a driver’s license. Subsection (4) specifically says “A person operating a road machine”. There is no definition of a “road machine” anywhere in the IVC, so apparently that is left to the discretion of the lawman. Is a rubber tire end-loader a machine? Yes. Is a mobile crane a machine? Yes. Common sense leads a reasonable person to believe that if both are machines and both are operated on roads, then they are “road machines”. Still not convinced? Read on.

First start with the definition of a “motor vehicle” found in section 1-146. The first line starts with “Every vehicle…” Stop right there and jump to the definition of a “vehicle” found in 1-217. It is here that a vehicle is defined as “Every device, in, upon or by which any person or property is or may be transported…” Is SME a device? A reasonable person could argue it is. However, is SME designed to transport persons or property? According to the definition of SME in 1-191, SME it is not. It specifically says in that section “Every vehicle not designed or used primarily for the transportation of persons or property”.

But wait! It says “Every vehicle” in the definition of SME. This is a problem. The definition of SME says “vehicle”, but the definition of a vehicle directly contradicts the definition of SME. Which statute should a police officer follow when interpreting the law? It is in these situations where police officers need not be the lawyer and instead look to the agency with regulatory authority. In this case, the Illinois Secretary of State.

Both the statutory definition of “vehicle” and “motor vehicle” divide vehicles into two categories, the first and second divisions. The article last week made it clear that SME is not a second division vehicle, leaving only the definition of a first division vehicle for SME to fall into. The problem with this is SME, by definition, does not meet the requirement of a first division vehicle either. Now guess which regulatory agency also says SME does not fit in either category of vehicle? You guessed right…the SOS.

Even though the definition of SME includes the word “vehicle”, it is not a vehicle per statute. And if it is not a vehicle, then it is not a motor vehicle. And if it is not a motor vehicle, then the operator need not be licensed per 6-101. If the Illinois SOS will not license a driver operating SME, then how can police officers hold them accountable to having a license that will not be granted by the very agency with the authority to do so?

Sometimes though, special mobile equipment requires a CDL…but that topic is a horse (and a future article) of a different color.