Western Highway Institute, a non-profit California corporation, functions as a research, engineering and coordination agency in support of the organized motor carrier industry in the 13 Western states, the three Western provinces of Canada, and Yukon Territory. Headquarters of the Institute are at 130 Montgomery Street, San Francisco, California 94104. William G. White Executive Committee Jack L. Belyea, Newport Beach Robert W. Franck, Columbus Charles E. Gloeckner, San Francisco C. G. Zwingle, Oakland Staff Executive Director Executive Assistant. Director of Research Highway Research Engineer Jess N. Rosenberg Fred J. Myers Thurman D. Sherard Pierce A. Carmichael Grace-Jean Bowles Senator GRUENING. These studies have been included by reference for the benefit of the committee. Thank you very much, Senator Henry. Mr. HENRY. Thank you. Senator GRUENING. I have one question. If I recall correctly, there was a collapse of a bridge in the neighborhood of Tacoma some years ago. Do you remember that, a support and suspension bridge? Mr. HENRY. The one that we call Galloping Gerti, the one that blew down the bridge. That bridge has been replaced. Senator GRUENING. What was the cause of that collapse? Do you recall? Mr. HENRY. The cause of the collapse, and I would hate to be placed under oath for libel or something of that nature, but the reported cause of the collapse was the design of the bridge. When they built the new bridge, they changed the design of the side railings and so forth so that they did not become a sail to pick up all of the winds that sailed through Tacoma, The Narrows Bridge, between the sites of both ends of that bridge. Senator GRUENING. That collapse, then, had nothing to do with overloading? Mr. HENRY. No. At the time of the collapse, I think there were only two or three automobiles on the bridge and one automobile was lost. It became a wind problem and the bridge started to twist. I have seen motion pictures of the collapse of the bridge; it was taken by Professor Parkinson of the University of Washington who happened to be at the end of the bridge as the action started. It was phenomenal the way that concrete roadway would buckle just like somebody snapping a whip. Senator GRUENING. Was anybody held responsible for the poor construction? Mr. HENRY. Not that I recall. I think the only man that got caught was the man who had collected the insurance premiums and decided that he would keep them himself because the bridge was going to be there forever and was notified about the time he was out on the golf course that the bridge had blown down. I imagine he had a rather sick feeling in the pit of his stomach. Senator GRUENING. Thank you very much, Senator. Senator Cooper, have you any questions? Senator COOPER. I have no questions. Senator GRUENING. Senator Spong. Senator SPONG. Yes. Mr. Henry, I will ask you the same question I asked Senator Collier. Does Washington have different weight limits for its Interstate System and for its primary system of highways? Mr. HENRY. No. I should have also stated that we have also beefed up our State patrol. We have a complete vehicle weight system in our State where trucks must go over the scales, in the vicinity of the logging area where I represent, if they have runs where they can manage to bypass a scale house, the weighing policeman, the weight policemen in that area carry individual scales and go out and apprehend them when they least expect it and have them run their trucks up on the scales. So we have a very good system. Senator SPONG. Should this bill be enacted and the weight limit on the Interstate System be increased as a result thereof, do you contemplate that the State would do it for all its highways at the same time? Mr. HENRY. I think the State would do it. As a matter of fact, I doubt seriously that the State would go to the full limit. Senator SPONG. That is as far as the interstate is concerned and that is in your statement. Mr. HENRY. Other highways, too. Senator SPONG. I am asking if there is a possibility that you can end up with one weight limit for the Interstate System in Washington and a different limit for your primary highway system. Mr. HENRY. I don't think so. The only restrictions we place is in the areas mainly where I live where you have some severe winter conditions and they have the same weight limits but they do that while the ground is under thaw or something like that. They put restrictions on the hauling at that particular time but those are later lifted so there is no particular problem. Otherwise, it will be the same uniformity throughout the State. Senator SPONG. Would the weight increase provided in the bill have the effect of substantially increasing the maintenance cost, in your opinion? Mr. HENRY. Not in our State, I don't believe so. Senator SPONG. Not in Washington. Thank you very much, Senator. Mr. HENRY. Thank you. Senator GRUENING. Senator Baker. Senator BAKER. I have no questions. Senator GRUENING. Have you any questions, Mr. Chairman? Thank you, Senator Henry. We are very appreciative of the fact that you two gentlemen have come from the Far West and the State where there is not too much rain in certain sections and a State where there is apparently constant rainfall. Mr. HENRY. I might say for the benefit of the committee, when he said something about needing water down there I gave him the same answer that I did to Congressman Udall in a meeting at Ugallis when he was needling me about the Washington water. I told them they were welcome to the entire Columbia River after it passed Astoria and that is at the mouth. So, you may have all you want, Senator. Thank you, gentlemen. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, both of you. Mr. COLLIER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The CHAIRMAN. William A. Bresnahan, the managing director of the American Trucking Associations, Inc., is our fourth witness this morning. Will there be other people accompanying you, Mr. Bresnahan? Mr. BRESNAHAN. Unless they deserted me, Senator. The CHAIRMAN. Perhaps you might properly identify or have the gentlemen who sit with you, Mr. Bresnahan, identify themselves so that the members of the subcommittee will know the men who sit at the witness table and so that those who are present in the hearing room would also have that information. Mr. BRESNAHAN. I intended to do that, Senator. I have it right here early in my statement. STATEMENT OF WILLIAM A. BRESNAHAN, MANAGING DIRECTOR, AMERICAN TRUCKING ASSOCIATIONS, INC.; ACCOMPANIED BY LEWIS C. KIBBEE, DIRECTOR, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT; RICHARD A. LILL, CHIEF, HIGHWAY ENGINEERING SECTION; EDWARD V. KILEY, RESEARCH COUNSEL; AND J. N. ROSENBERG, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Mr. BRESNAHAN. My name is William A. Bresnahan. I am managing director of the American Trucking Associations, Inc., with offices at 1616 P Street NW., Washington, D.C. The organization is a federation, with affiliated associations in every State and the District of Columbia, plus 13 national conferences, and in the aggregate we represent every type and class of truck operation in the country, both for hire and private. I have with me four of my colleagues who are especially qualified in different aspects of the matter before us, and they are here to assist in answering the questions of the committee. On my far left is Jess N. Rosenberg, executive director of the Western Highway Institute, San Francisco. On my immediate left is Edward V. Kiley, ATA research counsel, of our Washington office. On my far right is Lewis C. Kibbee, director of ATA's engineering department, whose long suit is automotive engineering. And on my immediate right is Richard A. Lill, ATA's chief highway engineer. For your convenience, we have attached to the front of your copies of my statement a card which identifies each of us, and you might want to keep it handy for reference as we go along. We are here to voice the support of America's truck operators of S. 2658, and to urge its enactment. The industry we represent fully recognizes and understands the need for sound controls on the weights and sizes of motor vehicles operating on the public highways. Such controls have been enforced by the States for almost as long as motor vehicles have existed. From the standpoint of weight, there are two different types of controls, each for a different purpose. First, there is a limit on the weight of the individual axles on a vehicle, and these axle limits are designed to protect the road, itself, as distinguished from bridges. In addition, every State has a gross weight limit—a limit on the total weight of the loaded vehicle for the purpose of protecting the bridges. Thus, if there were no bridges on the highway system there would be no need for a gross weight limit, since proper limits on properly spaced axles are all that would be needed to protect the road, itself. There are two types of axles and, therefore, two types of axleload limits. An axle that is separate by 8 or more feet of length from any other axle is called a single axle, and each State has a limit on the weight that can be carried on such a single axle. When two axles are closely coupled-that is, within 8 feet of each other they are called a tandem axle, and the States have limits on the weight of such tandem axles. The total weight permitted on the two axles comprising a tandem axle is generally somewhat less than the total permitted on two single axles. The reason is that when two axles are more than 8 feet apart, there is no overlapping of stresses when the two axles are less than 8 feet apart. Thus, two single axles might be limited to 18,000 pounds each or a total of 36,000 pounds, while the same State might limit a tandem axle to 32,000 pounds or an average of 16,000 pounds on each of the axles comprising the tandem. It is important to keep in mind and, therefore, might bear repeating that the highway, itself, is protected by the limits placed on single and tandem axles, not by the gross weight limits. The gross weight limits are designed solely to protect bridges, and most States graduate the permitted gross weights according to the distance over which, and the manner in which, the total weight is distributed. Seventy thousand pounds concentrated on a short vehicle will create more bridge stress than twice that weight properly distributed over a longer vehicle. The foregoing principles of axle weight and gross weight controls have been understood and applied in State laws for many years, and each State has applied them on the basis of its own soil conditions, road and bridge construction, traffic conditions, terrain, and economic needs. Therefore, while the individual States adhere to the same general engineering principles, the State laws are not all the same, and probably shouldn't be, unless we are prepared to retrogressively adjust ourselves everywhere to the poorest conditions existing anywhere. While uniformity might be a desirable objective, it would not make much sense to require those states with superior highways to adjust downward to the limits established in States with less advanced systems, any more than it would make sense to achieve uniformity by compelling the State with the less advanced system to allow weights that were practical and reasonable in the State with the better system. I think many sincere advocates of uniformity are inclined to be preoccupied with long distance truck operations involving the crossing of numerous State lines, and to overlook the fact that the preponderance of truck movements are of relatively short distances within a single State. In any event, in 1946 the American Association of State Highway Officials, in general pursuit of uniformity, published a booklet in which it set forth as a general guide to the States its recommendations for standard size and weight limits. These standards, which became known as the AASHO code, were premised on the kind of road systems and the conditions then prevailing in many States. |