>Hi folks, I'm from Canada and I have a question regarding
>this topic, I don't travel to MI much but when I do I need
>to make sure I follow the rules, so my questions is if the
>van is considered a truck, do I have to have pre/post trip
>inspection filled out (I check my van every morning but I
>don't currently keep track with an inspection book, probably
>should but...)and or logbook (comply with HOS rules)?
>
>Oh Oh wait, now do I have to drive double nickel (55MPH)
>too?
Simply no log, no pretrip but have to scale at an open scale.
As for speed, that is something I heard is weight related, anything over 10,001 lbs (4,536 KG) has to drive at truck speed (55MPH)
OH by the by, here is a link to the enforcment quarterly(
http://www.michigan.gov/documents/October_2005_142699_7.pdf), look on page 3 but here is what it says -
Act 300, amended by Act 179
· Creates Section 257.321g, which moves the
HM endorsement violations from Act 181 to Act
300.
· Deletes Section 257.714a, mudflaps, which is
moved to Act 181.
· Deletes Section 257.714b, fuel systems, which
conflicted with the FMCSR.
· Amended Section 257.723, identification
requirements:
o
Now applies to “commercial vehiclesâ€
(as defined in 257.7) single or
combination, GVWR/actual gross, over
5,000 lbs., and all wreckers.
o Vehicles in compliance with Section
390.21 of the FMCSR shall be deemed
in compliance with 257.723.
o The farm/manufacturer plate exemption
only applies to vehicles under 10,000
lbs.
· Section 257.724(5) – language identifying what
vehicles are required to cross the scales is
clarified:
o Commercial vehicles (as defined in
257.7) with other vehicles or trailers in
combination;
o
A truck or truck tractor, single or in
combination;
o Any special mobile equipment.
· Section 257.724(7) – dumping load to avoid a
weigh is now a violation of the “refuse to weighâ€
provision.
The thing is that that the first
bold statement is interpreted as any commercial vehicle can be considered a truck hence the second
bold statement is where they get all this from. I undestand that the statement before the second
bold statement is also interpreted to include vans and sprinter. This is how it was explained to me. This is not the enforcement bullitin I have, that one goes into detail of different situations.