breath test problems

ok I though he may be a company driver. So he owns his truck or is he leasing through a company.

 

I was an intoxilyzer opperator in the state of mn for 15 years. My certification lapsed about 5 years ago.

A couple of things came to mind. In mn the hand held device would be called a preliminary breath test. You need to know the make and model of the device so you can obtain a copy of the operation manual. When my department bought new pbts I read the opperation manual. There is an range of error for the device. The device needs to be calibrated every so often in accordance to the manufacturers recommendations. The callabration must be recorded. The scale master must be trained on the use of the device and also in detecting impaired behavior. He must provide reasonable articuble suspicion that points to alcohol or drug use.

After reading the instructions of our new pbts I found things that I was doing wrong because I had never been trained in its proper use. I questioned several of my friends and non of them had read the owners manual. The training they had revived was always from another officer. There is more to just telling somebody to blow in the machine. The devices we used had a proper opperating temperature. If it was to cold you needed to warm them up. You could only administer so many test in a given period of time. Good chance that the scale master didn't read the directions for its proper use.

If your husband was given an intoxylizer test he should have received a printout of the results.

 

It's funny how an expert is someone that actually bothered to read the instructions...

... just sayin'.

 

Your absolutely right. To put it into perspective how many drivers read the owner manuals for their trucks or trailers. How many read their lease purchase agreements or contracts for employment.

If it isn't in writing it's just somebody's opinion.

 

Totally agree. In the case of the OP it smells fishy. I think you and others with knowledge of how breathalyzer tests are supposed to work have given insight how the OP's husband can, and MUST beat the rap. It's a bad rap for sure.

 

The minimum detectable level of alcohol for all drivers, aircraft pilots etc. is 0.02g%. Any reading below this is not considered alcohol. This is so because some intoxylizers do not detect just alcohol, but rather many of the older devices and many of the handheld non-evidentary devices detect other chemical compounds similar in molecular structure to alcohol. Knowing this, the lowest detectable amount was set at 0.02%, and a reading of less that this can be considered or assumed to be any of the other compounds, but it is not to be considered to be alcohol. Many, many people will have such a reading. Since the driver's reading was 0.016%, the reading was below a detectable amount and who ever performed the test should have taken no further action. Obviously he was operating outside of his training. If he had no training or if it was a matter of him reading or not reading the manual then the state needs correcting.

 

Whoooa now, LSP class of 1976