Snowplow Forums banner

1 - 4 of 4 Posts

46 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
There is an amendment under discussion in the Michigan Transportation Committee to the existing trucking regulations which would exempt trucks under 26001 from the federal guidelines that apply to trucks over 26001 which Michigan chose to apply to trucks under 26001. Confused, so is the entire industry. I had the opportunity to testify last week in front of the committee on your behalf. Please read the article below and respond on line as you please but also to Amy Frankmann at The Michigan Nursery and Landscape Association so that she can evaluate where we stand. Oh yeah, make it professional no tongue in cheek stuff.

Herm Witte

Thank you to all that were able to attend the House Transportation Committee last week! It was a good show of support of HB 5228 that would change the definition of a commercial motor vehicle to a GVWR or GWR of 26,001 pounds or more.

We had another meeting today to discuss concerns that others had with this Bill and I NEED YOUR INPUT on this new proposal:

1) The definition of Commercial Motor Vehicle would change to 26,001 pounds or more.
2) This would exempt any truck or truck & trailer combination under 26,000 pounds from these parts of the Federal Motor Carrier Act:
– 390 – General – Accident register, USDOT number, MCS – 150 ID reports and filing schedule
– 395 – Driver’s Hours of Service
– 396 – Inspection, Repair & Maintenance
3) But you would still have to comply with these parts:
– 391 – Driver Qualification and Investigation –driver qualification file, drive investigative history file, documentation of driver’s rights disclosure
– 392 – Driving of Commercial Motor Vehicles - drug and alcohol
– 393 – Brakes, Safety Devices, Cargo Securement
4) It would make it mandatory, if you're pulled over, that you be notified and allowed 14 days to fix what you are ticketed for, and if you fix it you don't have to pay the ticket.
5) AND the law would state that you can only receive 1 ticket per day.

We discussed taking the money that is being generated from the fines and redirecting it away from whoever is pulling you over. This would remove the incentive to pull us over. This is where we'd like to see this go (tough fight with the local law enforcement agencies).

INPUT NEEDED: Let me know your thoughts on this new proposal. Either call me or send me an email asap.

Amy Frankmann
Michigan Nursery and Landscape Association
2149 Commons Parkway
Okemos, MI 48864
Ph 1-800-879-6652
Fax (517) 381-0638
E-mail [email protected]

1,450 Posts
Looking good!

My wife spoke to Greg McMaster today. He says the senate has moved the vote from end of May to this coming Wednesday the 25th. Anybody especially close by should stop by and testify at the senate. Its around noon I believe. This was very persuasive apparently when it occured at the house. Democrats are leaning toward voting for it. Snyder will sign it.

And we can all live happily ever after... :popcorn2

1,450 Posts
Wrong date. Here is a more detailed description:

Please pass this around to everyone who is interested in making sure this bill (HB 5228) passes. I know it's hard for some because of time, but if they could show up for the committee hearing, it would pass for sure. They could even testify (not like court) and tell the senate how important this bill means to their business , how much they have lost in revenue or time because of the over-regulation in years past.

This draft legislation sailed through the House because the room was packed! Let's do it again!


Greg MacMaster
State Representative
105th District


COMMITTEE: Senate Transportation

DATE: Tuesday, April 24, 2012

TIME: 12:30 p.m.

PLACE: Room 100, Farnum Building
125 W. Allegan Street, Lansing, MI 48933

PHONE: Leta Howard (373-5314), Committee Clerk


SB 1030 Sen. Caswell Traffic control; traffic regulation; certain requirements for stopping for school bus; revise.

SB 1034 Sen. Hildenbrand Vehicles; registration; multiple reinstatements of license suspended for nonpayment of driver responsibility fee; allow under
certain circumstances.

HB 5228 Rep. MacMaster Transportation; carriers; applicability of motor carrier safety act of 1963 to certain commercial vehicles; revise to exclude
commercial vehicles weighing under 26,001 pounds.

And any other business properly before the committee.

Individuals who wish to submit written testimony need to supply a minimum of 15 copies for distribution.

46 Posts
Discussion Starter #4
Michigan Trucking Regulation update

I am pleased to provide the following information which I received from the Michigan Nursery and Landscape Association;

"On June 29, 2012, Michigan's trucking regulations were revolutionized as HB 5228 was signed by Governor Snyder and filed with the Secretary of State. Now known as Public Act 231 of 2012, this new law was filed with immediate effect.

HB 5228, as introduced by Rep. Greg MacMaster (R-Kewadin), redefined an intrastate commercial motor vehicle as being greater than 26,001 GVWR or GCWR. This is a huge win for the Green Industry!

What does this mean to you? If you have vehicles under 26,001 GVWR and drive only in the State of Michigan, you are no longer considered to be driving a commercial motor vehicle and only need to comply with parts 391, 392, and 393 of the Federal Regulations. In addition, through the process the following issues were addressed and continue to apply to vehicles between 10,001 and 26,000 GVWR or GCWR:
* Exempts the above class of vehicles from all adopted portions of the Federal Regulations, except for Parts 391 through 393
* Retains Age of Driver provisions that allow minimum driver age at 18 vs. 21
* Retains grandfathering provisions for medical cards
* Retains farm vehicle driver exemption language
* Exempts Hours of Service provisions for seasonal construction related activities

MNLA is working with the Michigan Farm Bureau and the Michigan Center for Truck Safety to develop an easy-to-use compliance tool."
1 - 4 of 4 Posts