Truck size and weight legislation returns…again

Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) this week reintroduced legislation, entitled the Safe Highways and Preservation Act of 2013 (SHIPA), which is geared to keep bigger and heavier trucks off the road and apply existing federal truck size and weight limits to the entire National Highway System, rather than interstate highways, which is the case today.

By ·

Here we go again.

That sentiment, of course, could apply to just about anything, but in this case it has to do with the case for increased truck sizes and weight, or rather the case against it. This quarrel, it seems, has been going on for a very, very long time, regardless of which side you may be on.

The latest chapter was written this week, with Senator Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) reintroducing legislation, entitled the Safe Highways and Preservation Act of 2013 (SHIPA), which is geared to keep bigger and heavier trucks off the road and apply existing federal truck size and weight limits to the entire National Highway System, rather than interstate highways, which is the case today. 

“When super-sized tractor-trailers are on the road, they are a threat to drivers and the integrity of our highways and bridges,” Lautenberg said in a statement. “Closing the loophole that keeps these long, overweight trucks on our National Highway System will protect families and preserve our nation’s infrastructure.  Trucks play a critical role in our nation’s economy, but they also share the roads with our families, so we must do everything we can to make our nation’s highways safer and prevent tragic accidents.  This is thoughtful, common-sense legislation that would maintain our highways, grow our economy, and ensure safe roads for commuters and families.”

The specifics of the SHIPA Act call for: applying the current limits of 80,000 pounds and the maximum length of 53 feet for tractor-trailer trucks to the entire National Highway System, with certain exemptions allowed, including firefighting equipment; extend certain restrictions to the 222,000-mile NHS; expand the current freeze on triple-tractor trailer operations on interstates to apply to the NHS; and close loopholes that allow the operation of overweight trucks and establish an enforcement program to ensure accountability.

Lautenberg’s office also highlighted that bigger trucks represent risks, including longer stopping distances, increased risks of rollover and trailers merging into adjacent lanes, with a 100,000 pound truck with unadjusted brakes moving 25 percent further after a driver applies brakes than an 80,000 pound truck and larger trucks representing a higher share of deaths based on miles traveled compared to standard vehicle traffic, as well as threats to the country’s roads, bridges, and other infrastructure.

Given the ongoing political paralysis in Washington, where passing legislation of any type these days can almost be viewed as a minor miracle of sorts, there could not be much of a chance this bill actually even goes anywhere.

What’s more, just last year a bill was dropped that calls for increasing truck size and weight.

That bill, the Safe and Efficient Transportation Act (H.R. 763 and S. 747), gained the support of about 200 shippers, carriers and allied associations, and it authorized the use of higher productivity, six-axle single-trailer vehicles weighing up to 97,000 pounds. Truck lengths would not be affected.
 
The bill would give states the option to implement higher weight limits on interstate borders within their limits—where appropriate. Backers say it would result in fewer trucks on the highways, less pollution, reduced emissions, bolster productivity and perhaps save as much as 2 billion gallons in diesel annually.

Even with those benefits, there is plenty of opposition. Safety advocacy groups such as Public Citizen have routinely railed against past efforts to modernize truck weight laws, and can be counted on to do so again. Labor groups such as the Teamsters union also are against such legislation, even though Teamster drivers account for only about 60,000 jobs in the LTL sector out of the total of as many as 3 million long-haul truck drivers.

The 80,000-pound limit was set in 1982, as part of the Surface Transportation Assistance Act. Industry leaders say after 30 years and numerous safety advances in technology and a stronger safety record than ever, it is time to revisit the weight standard.

And industry backers clamoring for larger and heavier trucks point to the fact that these trucks would result in less congestion, and consolidating freight on fewer trucks would cut vehicle miles traveled, save fuel, reduce emissions and allow U.S. businesses to cut costs and improve their competitive edge in a global market place, they say.

While there was no traction made for increased truck size and weight in last year’s MAP-21 federal transportation legislation, the bill did call for provisions directing the Secretary of Transportation to study the effects of truck, size and weight on highway safety and infrastructure.


About the Author

Jeff Berman, Group News Editor
Jeff Berman is Group News Editor for Logistics Management, Modern Materials Handling, and Supply Chain Management Review. Jeff works and lives in Cape Elizabeth, Maine, where he covers all aspects of the supply chain, logistics, freight transportation, and materials handling sectors on a daily basis. Contact Jeff Berman

Subscribe to Logistics Management Magazine!

Subscribe today. It's FREE!
Get timely insider information that you can use to better manage your entire logistics operation.
Start your FREE subscription today!

Latest Whitepaper
eBook: Why Multi-Tier Supplier Collaboration is More Important Now
Explore the benefits of supplier collaboration including sharing demand forecasts, faster reactions to demand or capacity changes and well-coordinated product launches.
Download Today!
From the September 2017 Logistics Management Magazine Issue
While Amazon’s recent bid to purchase Whole Foods made mainstream headlines, the e-commerce giant will still need to adhere to time-tested realities. Any way you slice it, the integrated U.S. cold chain requires optimized service from existing ports, 3PLs, cold storage warehousing, transportation providers and high-value vendors.
Improving 3PL Management: Glanbia Adds Muscle to Logistics
Why Retail Supply Chain Transformations Fail - and how to get it right
View More From this Issue
Subscribe to Our Email Newsletter
Sign up today to receive our FREE, weekly email newsletter!
EDITORS' PICKS
26th Annual Study of Logistics and Transportation Trends: Transportation at Digital Speed
While a majority of companies strongly agree that transportation is a strategically important...
34th Annual Quest for Quality Awards: Winners Revealed
Which carriers, third-party logistics providers, and North American ports have crossed the service...

2017 Salary Survey: Fresh Voices Express Optimism
Our “33rd Annual Salary Survey” reflects more diversity entering the logistics management...
LM Exclusive: Major Modes Join E-commerce Mix
While last mile carriers receive much of the attention, the traditional modal heavyweights are in...