WE WON!! PENNDOT HAS OFFICIALLY SUSPENDED APPROVAL FOR THESE DEVICES AND OUR HARD WORK BROUGHT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM UNDER THE MICROSCOPE!! THANK YOU FOR STAYING VIGILANT AND KEEPING THE PRESSURE ON TO ENSURE JUSTICE FOR DRIVERS ACROSS THE STATE!!
April 10, 2025
Final supporters
Pennsylvania is the only state which prohibits local police (as opposed to state police) from using radar for speed enforcement.
As a result, certain devices and techniques are used in PA but rarely if ever in other states. One such device is ENRADD (Electronic Non-RAdar Detection Device) model EJU-91 wireless.
Based on information obtained through Open Records requests and other research, there appear to be significant issues related to:
1) The appearance of the ENRADD model EJU-91 wireless on the list of devices approved by PennDOT for use in PA, and on whose authority and on what basis that approval was granted.
2) The real-world accuracy of the device when used on roads vs. controlled laboratory settings, and various error mechanisms which do not appear to have been thoroughly reviewed as part of the approval process.
3) The manner in which the devices are being calibrated state-wide, and whether such calibrations are being done according to 67 PA Code 105.56(e) as prescribed by regulation.
Additional detail from PA Senate Transportation Committee testimony can be found here: http://transportation.pasenategop.com/files/2014/0...
Such issues may be resulting in large numbers of unfair citations to PA motorists based on readings from these devices.
The intent of this petition is to coax PennDOT to suspend approval of the ENRADD device pending a thorough technical and regulatory investigation of these issues, or absent action by PennDOT, to encourage the PA State Senate, PA House, and/or PA Attorney General to see that the device approval is suspended and the matter is investigated thoroughly.
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
February 11, 2025
71 Comments
These devices must be investigated to verify error-free speed readings under all real-world conditions before they are permitted to be used for traffic enforcement. To do otherwise sends a clear signal to all drivers in Pennsylvania that our political leaders care more about taking money out of the pockets of motorists, even if done dishonestly.
Untested technology like this should not be used in the Commonwealth. If one innocent person has to pay higher insurance and a fine when they were not speeding this would be a travesty. The police instead of "hiding" should be visible to stop reckless driving instead of finding a way to hide and write tickets. When police are visible people drive safe.
Got a ticket for going 44 in a 25 mph, except I went through it 2 more times and ENRADD recorded my speed at 7 mph faster than I was going. The police wouldn't believe me and I am waiting for court. Incidentally the officer said there were 2 cars and he wasn't sure if I was going 41 or 44, but he thought I was going 44.
Just pleaded not guilty to 53 in 35 mph. Citation from Catawissa, PA. Awaiting hearing date and have photos showing 8inch delta from air dam to front bumper on 2014 Honda Odyssey Van in question, Would appreciate any help from you Mr. Drack. I know I'm right but need any other help prior to my hearing. Will not be hiring an attorney.
The device measuring distance is 3 feet not far enough. The analysis performed is as good as the sample taken and 3 feet is an insufficient sample.
I agree that they system. has too many variables and inaccuracies. Underdeveloped and under-researched
Just isn't accurate
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
WE WON!! PENNDOT HAS OFFICIALLY SUSPENDED APPROVAL FOR THESE DEVICES AND OUR HARD WORK BROUGHT THE ENTIRE SYSTEM UNDER THE MICROSCOPE!! THANK YOU FOR STAYING VIGILANT AND KEEPING THE PRESSURE ON TO ENSURE JUSTICE FOR DRIVERS ACROSS THE STATE!!
April 10, 2025
Final supporters
Pennsylvania is the only state which prohibits local police (as opposed to state police) from using radar for speed enforcement.
As a result, certain devices and techniques are used in PA but rarely if ever in other states. One such device is ENRADD (Electronic Non-RAdar Detection Device) model EJU-91 wireless.
Based on information obtained through Open Records requests and other research, there appear to be significant issues related to:
1) The appearance of the ENRADD model EJU-91 wireless on the list of devices approved by PennDOT for use in PA, and on whose authority and on what basis that approval was granted.
2) The real-world accuracy of the device when used on roads vs. controlled laboratory settings, and various error mechanisms which do not appear to have been thoroughly reviewed as part of the approval process.
3) The manner in which the devices are being calibrated state-wide, and whether such calibrations are being done according to 67 PA Code 105.56(e) as prescribed by regulation.
Additional detail from PA Senate Transportation Committee testimony can be found here: http://transportation.pasenategop.com/files/2014/0...
Such issues may be resulting in large numbers of unfair citations to PA motorists based on readings from these devices.
The intent of this petition is to coax PennDOT to suspend approval of the ENRADD device pending a thorough technical and regulatory investigation of these issues, or absent action by PennDOT, to encourage the PA State Senate, PA House, and/or PA Attorney General to see that the device approval is suspended and the matter is investigated thoroughly.
Updates
Reached 100 supporters
February 11, 2025
71 Comments
I recieved a fraudulent ticket from this flawed device and challenged it in court, effectively proving it false. The judge stated that while I made good points, he had to find me guilty because he "was not an engineer."
These devices must be investigated to verify error-free speed readings under all real-world conditions before they are permitted to be used for traffic enforcement. To do otherwise sends a clear signal to all drivers in Pennsylvania that our political leaders care more about taking money out of the pockets of motorists, even if done dishonestly.
Untested technology like this should not be used in the Commonwealth. If one innocent person has to pay higher insurance and a fine when they were not speeding this would be a travesty. The police instead of "hiding" should be visible to stop reckless driving instead of finding a way to hide and write tickets. When police are visible people drive safe.
Got a ticket for going 44 in a 25 mph, except I went through it 2 more times and ENRADD recorded my speed at 7 mph faster than I was going. The police wouldn't believe me and I am waiting for court. Incidentally the officer said there were 2 cars and he wasn't sure if I was going 41 or 44, but he thought I was going 44.
Just pleaded not guilty to 53 in 35 mph. Citation from Catawissa, PA. Awaiting hearing date and have photos showing 8inch delta from air dam to front bumper on 2014 Honda Odyssey Van in question, Would appreciate any help from you Mr. Drack. I know I'm right but need any other help prior to my hearing. Will not be hiring an attorney.
The device measuring distance is 3 feet not far enough. The analysis performed is as good as the sample taken and 3 feet is an insufficient sample.
I agree that they system. has too many variables and inaccuracies. Underdeveloped and under-researched
Just isn't accurate
Share this petition
Share this petition to help it reach more people.
Your share link
Petitions like this
Other petitions you might want to support
Scan to share
Anyone who scans this can sign the petition.
I recieved a fraudulent ticket from this flawed device and challenged it in court, effectively proving it false. The judge stated that while I made good points, he had to find me guilty because he "was not an engineer."