ISSUE: Oppose the Safe Highways and Infrastructure Preservation Act (SHIPA)

BACKGROUND: SHIPA extends federal regulation of truck size and weight limits to the National Highway System (NHS), which includes the Interstate Highway System and about 100,000 additional miles of primary highways. Approximately 75% of truck travel occurs on the NHS. Under the bill, the federal axle weight, gross weight and bridge formula limits that currently apply only to Interstates would apply to the entire NHS. In addition, the federal government would, for the first time, establish a single-trailer length limit, establishing the national limit on trailer lengths at 53 feet. Furthermore, the bill would require the Federal Highway Administration to revisit their definition of a non-divisible load, and to apply federal non-divisible load regulations to the entire NHS. The bill also includes a grandfather right which states that “…if the vehicle or combination was in actual and lawful operation in the State on a regular or periodic basis before August 1, 2001” the vehicle could continue to operate.

DISCUSSION: The bill is very problematic for several reasons. First, it exacerbates the existing problems created by rigid federal regulation of size and weight standards. Those states that identify, through reform of size and weight regulations, opportunities to improve highway safety, reduce their highway maintenance and capacity costs, reduce congestion and air pollution, or respond to economic needs, are further restricted from pursuing these opportunities under SHIPA. In addition, because states would be forced to apply the federal standards to new highways if they are on the NHS, states will not have the authority to shift heavier or longer trucks on to highways that can better handle those trucks.

The bill would also freeze regulations beyond those associated with truck configuration or access route. Therefore, for example, if a state has a grandfather right allowing trucks with a gross weight of 85,000 pounds and the state adds a new highway to its Interstate system, the heavier trucks would be restricted under SHIPA from using the new highway. Under SHIPA, if the state changes its speed limit for trucks from 60 mph to 65 mph, the 85,000 pound trucks would still have to comply with the lower limit on new highway segment. Beside the absurdity of such a situation, it is essentially unenforceable. This is just one example of many problematic situations that would occur if SHIPA passes.

The intent of the grandfather rights in the bill is to prevent a size and weight rollback. However, because the bill requires the state to identify trucks that were in “actual and lawful operation” prior to August 1, 2001, in order for the state to retain the grandfather right, it would have to prove that trucks of a particular weight or length were actually operating on specific roads. Without documentation, such as a single-trip permit specifying the operation of heavier trucks on a particular route, or weigh-station data documenting legal truck weights (only a very few states collect this, on a limited basis), it is unclear as to how a state is to prove that specifically defined trucks were operating on specified routes. Therefore, some rollbacks should be expected.

In a 2002 study on truck sizes and weights, the National Academy of Sciences warned against expanding federal regulatory authority to routes currently regulated by States, which is exectly what SHIPA attempts to do. Furthermore, several State governments have come out against passage of SHIPA. The bill will be difficult to implement and enforce, and will result in less safe highways, higher freight transportation costs and additional highway repair expenditures.

...more at Wally's World