VEHICLE SIZES AND WEIGHTS WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 21, 1968 U.S. SENATE, SUBCOMMITTEE ON ROADS OF THE The subcommittee met at 9:40 a.m., pursuant to call, in room 4200 Senate Office Building, Senator William B. Spong, Jr., presiding. Present: Senators Spong, and Jordan of Idaho. Also present: M. Barry Meyer, committee counsel; Bailey Guard, assistant chief clerk (minority); and Martin Baker, staff assistant. Senator SPONG. The hearings will be in order. Our first witness this morning will be the distinguished senior Senator from California, Senator Kuchel. STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS H. KUCHEL, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA Senator KUCHEL. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am very pleased to have this opportunity to appear before this committee as a cosponsor of S. 2658, the proposal presently before you. I believe this bill to be a most important step forward in strengthening and developing our Nation's highway system, which is the very lifeline of the United States. Crisscrossing this country are thousands of different highways that weave in and around much of America's geography. Like a human circulatory system, these highways transport the vital needs of the people. And accompanying the transport of these essential goods is the growth and economic development that mean a stronger and more prosperous America. Nowhere is this more true than in the western part of our country. The fantastic growth of population in what was formerly sparsely settled areas has made the full utilization of highway transportation extremely important. In my part of the country, Mr. Chairman, the population has grown over 40 percent during the last decade while the growth in the rest of the country was only at the rate of about 15 percent. Commercial vehicle ownership in that region increased on an even greater basis-64 percent-and the Bureau of Public Roads prediction is that the rate of increase will be more than double that figure by 1976. This tremendous growth has caused a rapidly expanding demand for highway transportation for which there is no viable alternative. Our basic industries, our farms, mines, forests, factories, and defense installations are dispersed throughout the region; and they require highway transportation commensurate with the growth which has taken place in population and in economic scale. In my own State of California, we have over 20 million people, highly mobile people, concentrated in a few widely separate centers spread out over our 158,700 square miles. This dispersion requires a massive highway and transportation network. Growth in motor vehicle transportation and in the highway system during the last decade has been phenomenal. There are some 155,000 miles of roads in California; there are 12 million registered California vehicles. We are currently in the process of constructing a 12,000-mile network of improved freeways to be completed by 1980 at a cost of over $12 billion. Our growth in the West, Mr. Chairman, continues to boom. Population and industrial forecasts demonstrate this to be the case. We are far from reaching our full development and the great potential so generously endowed upon us by the nature of the West. In order to meet the responsibilities of this growth, it is imperative that, while we encourage the optimum use of all available forms of transportation, we give attention to fostering the most efficient use of our highway system. We have an obligation to enhance the opportunities for highway transportation and remove all unreasonable and unnecessary impediments and restrictions on their use. From the passage of the Federal Highway Act of 1916, the legislative goal has been to utilize the roads and highways to the full extent of their ability, in order that the necessary movement of goods and people might progress unimpeded by artificial or untested regulations. Historically, the rapid development of the motor vehicle and the rate of western economic development exceeded the ability of the highway facilities to keep pace. This was good and its effects were apparent in the tremendous economic growth in the last half century. But what of tomorrow-the time when our economy will demand even greater utilization? Today, for the first time in our history, there are roads whose capacities are not fully available because of outdated regulations and restrictions. And perhaps for the first time in our history, the rate of economic development in our Western States is being stagnated by unreasonable deterrents to a full and reasonable use of our highway investments. At the present time, the Nation's trucking industry is severely hampered by the presence, in Federal laws, of motor vehicle size and weight limitations which are no longer in line with the design capabilities of today's modern highways. When Congress passed the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1956, it provided for certain maximum sizes and weights for motor vehicles using the National System of Interstate and Defense Highways. These 1956 limitations, however, were 10-year-old standards at the time they were placed first in the Federal law. They were taken from a set of size and weight standards adopted by the American Association of State Highway Officials in 1946. And these 1946 standards were based on the roads which existed 20 or more years ago. Today, with the expanded highway program we have provided, and are continuing to provide, modern highways are capable of more efficient utilization. The time is long overdue, it seems to me, for a change in the Federal law to permit the States, in turn, to adapt their size and weight laws to the capabilities of today's modern highways. The desire for eventual improvement in the Federal standards was recognized by the Congress when it inserted the current limitations in the 1956 act. The committee report of that time clearly indicated that the 1956 limits were temporary, pending investigation by the Bureau of Public Roads. In 1964, the Secretary of Commerce submitted his size and weight recommendations to the Congress-recommendations, I might observe, which are largely embodied in the provisions of S. 2658. These recommended changes, I am persuaded, are of vital economic importance to the transportation of our western products. Agriculture, livestock, ore, lumber, and petroleum must move upon our highways. Any factors influencing the cost of such highway transportation are, of course, of the utmost importance to the well-being of these basic industries. If these sizes and weights are increased, it becomes obvious that more freight can be carried at a lower unit cost. Equally important, any economies resulting from greater weights are certain to be reflected in better prices for both the consumer and the producer. It is regrettable that action has been delayed for so long by the Congress in updating these restrictive regulations. During the last 12 years, numerous western interests have expressed deep concern over the need for change and improvement. Indeed, the Western Conference of the Council of State Governments has adopted resolutions urging congressional action in 1962, 1963, 1964, and 1965. These resolutions emphasized the overwhelming importance of highway transportation to the West and the continuing need for improved and more economical highway transportation, consistent with the needs of the western economy and the geometric and structural capacity of the highways being constructed today and being planned for the future. Senator SPONG. I am not an expert on what exact limitations should be enacted this decision I leave to the expertise of your committee. But one need not be an expert to know that there is something drastically wrong when a State cannot utilize a new highway to the fullest for the highest benefit of everyone because its use is restricted by outdated size and weight limitations. America's highways are not just an investment of Government; they are an investment of the people and all those dependent upon a full utilization of highway resources. That investment will be best served by standards permitting the most effective and efficient use of the Nation's total transportation resources. I believe S. 2658 seeks to achieve that end. I am hopeful that the committee will give it favorable consideration. I am glad, Mr. Chairman, to join with my friend and colleague from the State of Washington, the Senior Senator from that State, Senator Magnuson, and a group of our colleagues from both sides of the aisle in sponsoring this legislation. Senator SPONG. Thank you very much, Senator Kuchel. You are a former member of this committee and we are very pleased to have your views on this important subject. Senator KUCHEL. Thank you. Senator SPONG. Would you contemplate that, if S. 2658 is enacted, the State of California would establish different size and weight limitations for the primary system and the Interstate System? Senator KUCHEL. Yes, I do; and the people with whom I have talked in State government form the basis of the contemplation. There would unquestionably be changes made in the law, Senator. Senator SPONG. Thank you very much. Senator KUCHEL. Thank you, sir. Senator SPONG. The next witness will be the junior Senator from the State of Wyoming, Senator Hansen. We are very pleased to have you with us this morning. STATEMENT OF HON. CLIFFORD P. HANSEN, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WYOMING Senator HANSEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am grateful for this opportunity to present my views, and those of the State of Wyoming, before your subcommittee. As a cosponsor of S. 2658, I come to speak in support of the measure. The State of Wyoming is particularly dependent upon trucks. Wyoming covers a large area, with a relatively widely dispersed population. In many parts of the State, trucks are the only means for transporting raw materials, semifinished products, and finished goods. Let me cite, Mr. Chairman, some vital statistics which indicate the role which trucks play in Wyoming's economy: -Wyoming has 71,000 trucks registered, or 32 percent of all motor vehicles registered in the State. The national average is only 16 percent. -Almost 18,000 trucks, or 25 percent of the total in Wyoming, are devoted to ranch and farm use. -Wyoming has 159 truck dealers, whose annual sales exceeded $21 million in 1967. -The trucking industry accounts for 42,000 jobs-excluding those in agriculture-which generate $308 million annually in wages. -In fuel taxes alone, these trucks contribute annually $5.9 million to Wyoming, or 52 percent of all fuel taxes. -Wyoming's annual income from truck fees, permits, motor vehicle assessments, and property taxes comes to $4.9 million. These figures show one side of the picture of the significant contribution trucks make to Wyoming's economy. But this is not the whole story. The following Wyoming industries rely heavily, if not completely, upon trucks: Timber: trucks are used to haul cut trees from the mountains to the sawmills. -Ranching: trucks are used to haul livestock to and from summer and mountain ranges. Moreover, trucks provide practically 24hour transport service to the principal livestock markets at which Wyoming ranchers sell their animals. -Minerals: trucks carry uranium ore, iron ore, trona, bentonite, gypsum, and many other raw minerals to processing facilities. Processed minerals are trucked to the point of final sale. -Oil: trucks carry oil refined in Wyoming to statewide and national points of distribution for finished products. -Cement: again, trucks carry cement processed in Wyoming to in-State and out-of-State points of distribution. -Agriculture: trucks collect and distribute agricultural products and food to the processor, the wholesaler, and the retailer for the consumer's table. So you see, Mr. Chairman, that the trucking industry has played a vital and growing part in Wyoming's economy in recent years. Unfortunately, we in Wyoming were caught in the Federal freeze in 1956 with low single-axle weights. Our 18,000-pound limit was equal to that imposed by the Federal law, and was among the lowest in the Nation. Wyoming has not been able to raise our single-axle load limit despite the known economic need and the desire of our legislature to do so. Or, to be more specific, the legislature has not been able to ease the limit for our interstate highways, the State's critical arteries. Our tandem-axle limit is now 36,000 pounds, so we would gain nothing in that respect from the adoption of S. 2658. As the subcommittee knows, Mr. Chairman, this bill, S. 2658, would not require any State to raise its axle or gross-weight limits. It would, however, permit those States who desire to liberalize their limits, in accordance with their needs, to do so up to the new proposed Federal maxima. In Wyoming, we urgently need to modernize our size and weight limits. The need is so pressing, Mr. Chairman, that our legislature last year authorized increases up to the limits proposed in S. 2658increases which would take effect as soon as S. 2658 is passed. In conclusion, Mr. Chairman, I respectfully solicit your favorable action on S. 2658. It is vital to Wyoming's economy and progress. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Senator SPONG. Thank you very much, Senator Hansen. As you know, S. 2658 also provides for wider motor vehicles on the Interstate System. In your judgment, will the roads of Wyoming accommodate wider vehicles safely? Senator HANSEN. I think that they will. I would defer, however, to our State highway commission and our State highway department for a specific answer to that question. I am sure it has been the intent of Wyoming to construct good roads which fully comply with all of the Federal standards. My response would be that if Federal highways in other parts of the Nation would accommodate this extra width, I am certain that the same thing could be said of those Federal highways through Wyoming. Beyond that, I know that our State highway department, in building the State-financed roads, has been not unmindful of the need to fit our programing into a system which would make possible the accommodation of a vehicle if it starts down an interstate highway and winds up on a State highway. |