Trucking news: Mass. Representative McGovern has sights on truck size and weight in next highway bill
Jeff Berman, Group News Editor and John D. Schulz, Contributing Editor -- Logistics Management, 5/28/2009
MARLBOROUGH, Mass.—Earlier this year, Representative James P. McGovern (D-MA) introduced legislation that would expand the current truck weight limits of commercial weight vehicles on the 161,000 mile National Highway System. This legislation, dubbed the “Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act” (H.R. 1618)—also know as SHIPA—would also prohibit states from end-running the federal law and allowing longer and heavier trucks.
McGovern told LM at yesterday’s Council of Supply Chain Management (CSCMP) New England Roundtable that his goal is to have this legislation included as part of the next highway re-authorization bill. The current one—SAFETEA-LU—expires on September 30.
This legislation was a hot topic of debate at the recent National Strategic Shippers Council (NASSTRAC) annual conference, with many over-the-road freight carriers saying it would hinder productivity and slow down the flow of interstate commerce. What’s more, those against the bill say that it is “pro-railroad” legislation, and that there is a need for truck size and weight modernization that can be done safely and efficiently.
The SHIPA bill is in stark contrast to legislation introduced by Reps. Michael Michaud (D-Maine) and Jean Schmidt (R-Ohio), entitled the “Safe and Efficient Transportation Act of 2009” (H.R. 1799), which would increase truck weight limits to 97,000 pounds from the current 80,000 pound weight limit and allow states to authorize the operation of heavier trucks. In support of this bill, the American Trucking Associations (ATA) has said it would result in “safer highways, cleaner air and less costly freight transportation.”
Along with the ATA, other concerns supporting this bill include shippers, equipment manufacturers, and some large carriers. Those against it include railroads, roughly 1 million owner-operators, the Teamsters union and highway safety advocates. This ad hoc coalition also has supporters in Washington who have been successful in beating back any changes in truck productivity the past two decades.
Congressman McGovern was firm in his assessment that longer and heavier trucks are not the answer to operational improvements and congestion reduction.
“The idea of putting a ‘mini-train’ on the road is insane,” McGovern said. “To me, it is just not the way to go. I am not against the trucking industry; we need a robust trucking industry. But we don’t need heavier and longer trucks. It destroys our infrastructure and is more costly and more dangerous. We know that bigger and heavier trucks do not mean fewer trucks on the road, and we know it is not as safe. And the heavier trucks are means more wear and tear on our roads, so why are we going in that direction?”
The Michaud-Schmidt bill requires that trucks operating above 80,000 pounds must add a sixth axle to compensate for the extra weight. The extra axle adds two more brakes, preventing an increase in stopping distances and avoids additional pavement damage.
More importantly, the ATA claims operation of these new, more efficient vehicles will allow trucking companies to deliver the nation’s freight while making fewer trips. The result will be a reduction in the number of truck-related crashes, less fuel use—and reduced emissions and carbon—as well as less congestion on crowded U.S. highways. Fewer miles traveled could also translate into less pavement damage and lower highway maintenance costs, according to the ATA.
“As part of our Sustainability Initiative, ATA supports a number of reforms to federal truck size and weight regulation,” said ATA President and CEO Bill Graves. “The use of more efficient trucks, such as those allowed under the [Michaud-Schmidt] bill, will significantly reduce the trucking industry’s carbon output.”
View All On-Demand Webcasts
