Skip to content
Bills from the 2011–12 session

Assembly Bill 388

Overweight permits for vehicles transporting raw forest products

Topics: Bus and truck: Taxation or registration, Forestry, Road, Transportation, Department of: Vehicles

Stopped before the full Assembly voted

The recommended passing it, but the full Assembly never voted on it. To try again, a lawmaker would have to start a new bill.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Nov 21, 2011

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, stopped here

    Stopped here. The full Assembly never voted on it.

  4. Senate vote, not reached

  5. Governor, not reached

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, Mar 23, 2012: “Failed to pass pursuant to ⁠”

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Under current law, with limited exceptions, no person may operate on a highway any vehicle or vehicle combination that exceeds certain statutory weight limits unless the person obtains a permit issued by the Department of Transportation (DOT) or a local highway authority. In issuing an overweight permit, DOT may impose reasonable conditions and restrictions on the permittee as DOT deems necessary for the safety of travel and protection of the highways.

Under current law, DOT may issue annual or consecutive month permits for the transportation of raw forest products in vehicle combinations having a gross weight not exceeding 98,000 pounds if the vehicle combination has six or more axles and meets other criteria (RS permit). "Raw forest products" includes logs, poles, cordwood, wood chips, sawdust, and pulpwood. A vehicle combination operated under an RS permit is subject to certain operating restrictions, including that it cannot be operated on an interstate highway or any highway or bridge with a posted weight limit that is less than the vehicle combination's gross weight, except as described immediately below.

Read the full summary

Also under current law, DOT or a local highway authority may impose special weight limits on highways that, because of weakness of the roadbed due to deterioration or climatic conditions or other special or temporary conditions, would likely be seriously damaged or destroyed in the absence of the special limits. If special weight limits are imposed, the limits must be posted by highway signs along the affected highways. The special weight limits apply regardless of whether a vehicle is being operated under an overweight permit unless the permit expressly authorizes the special weight limits to be exceeded. When DOT issues an RS permit, the RS permit must expressly authorize the vehicle combination to exceed, on state trunk highways and state trunk highway routes designated as connecting highways, any special weight limits posted in connection with the thawing of frozen highways.

Under this bill, an RS permit issued by DOT may not contain any condition or limitation imposed by DOT in connection with the thawing of frozen highways that are not state trunk highways or connecting highways, except that the operation of the vehicle combination under the RS permit is subject to posted weight limits on these local highways.

Who's behind it

10 lawmakers are its ⁠. 8 are Republicans and 2 are Democrats.

3 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 13 names

Authors (10)

Signed on in support (3)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

Versions and amendments

Every text the Legislature printed for this bill, including proposed changes. Each opens on the Legislature's site.

How lawmakers voted

There was one vote on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Transportation vote on an amendment

Passed, 13 to 0 · Feb 2, 2012

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 13, Noes 0”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. Mar 23, 2012

    The session ended, and the bill died with it.

  2. Feb 2, 2012

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  3. Feb 2, 2012

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 13 to 0.

  4. Dec 19, 2011

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  5. Dec 13, 2011

    The committee held a public hearing.

  6. Nov 21, 2011

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Transportation.

  7. Nov 21, 2011

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Nov 21, 2011 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Mursau, Petrowski, Spanbauer, Tauchen, Clark, Bewley, Bernier, T. Larson, Endsley and Rivard;Cosponsored by Senators Galloway, Holperin and Jauch

  2. Nov 21, 2011 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to committee on Transportation

  3. Dec 13, 2011 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  4. Dec 19, 2011 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Jan 17, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Mursau

  6. Jan 24, 2012 · Assembly

    Assembly amendment 2 offered by Representative Mursau

  7. Jan 31, 2012 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  8. Feb 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 13, Noes 0

  9. Feb 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Report Assembly Amendment 2 adoption recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 13, Noes 0

  10. Feb 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Transportation, Ayes 13, Noes 0

  11. Feb 2, 2012 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  12. Feb 16, 2012 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 2-21-2012 by committee on Rules

  13. Feb 21, 2012 · Assembly

    Laid on the table

  14. Mar 23, 2012 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1

Terms on this page

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

More in the glossary

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1. More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Committee

A small group of lawmakers that looks at a bill first. Most bills never leave committee.

Senate Joint Resolution 1

The session's calendar. Any bill not passed by its last voting day dies.

Official term: Failed to pass pursuant to SJR 1

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote