WASHINGTON — Legislation being promoted for giving states more flexibility to waive truck weight limits in an emergency would also give state authorities broad new power to raise weight limits for all kinds of freight, according to a lobby group that opposes overweight trucks.
The legislation, the Modernizing Operations for Vehicles in Emergencies (MOVE) Act, introduced last month by U.S. Reps. Dusty Johnson, R-S.D., and Jim Costa, D-Calif., is a way to “remove unnecessary roadblocks and red tape” to avert supply chain disruptions such as what occurred during and after the pandemic, according to the bill’s sponsors, both of whom represent agribusiness shippers.
“During times of emergency and the pandemic, struggling communities in my district were hit hardest by roadblocks to our supply chain,” said Costa, whose district includes parts of California’s San Joaquin Valley. “This bipartisan legislation will remove barriers that prevent us from delivering vital relief when communities need it most.”
The MOVE Act expands the circumstances under which the federal government could allow a state to waive federal weight limits along interstate highways for loads “that can easily be dismantled or divided” to include not only natural emergencies involving weather, disease, and wildfires, and other causes but also if supply chains are “substantially impaired in the state, either in terms of slow overall movement, freight traffic congestion, or otherwise,” according to language in the bill.
The legislation would allow such waivers to remain in effect for 270 days, compared to the 120-day maximum under current law, with the ability for states to extend the waivers for another 90 days.
In addition to the American Trucking Associations, the MOVE Act is supported by the Shippers Coalition, whose members include agribusinesses, aggregates, beverage companies and other shippers of heavy cargo that benefits most from higher weight limits.
“The MOVE Act is a necessary step forward in ensuring that Shippers Coalition’s members are able to promptly and efficiently respond in times of crisis,” said Shippers Coalition Executive Director Sean Joyce. “By expanding the definition of an emergency, the legislation guarantees that Americans across the country will continue to have access to essential goods in their times of need.”
Safety concerns raised
But the Coalition Against Bigger Trucks (CABT), which opposes efforts to loosen truck weight limit requirements, sees the MOVE Act as a way to further empower states to raise weight restrictions, which can lead to higher crash rates.
The group points to a 2016 U.S. Department of Transportation report that found heavier trucks have higher crash rates compared to 80,000-pound, single-trailer trucks.
“State governors would have unilateral authority beyond emergencies and natural disasters to arbitrarily increase truck weights based on undefined definitions of supply chain disruptions or freight congestion,” CABT President Brad Roseberry told FreightWaves.
“There’s nothing prohibiting a state to reissue another permit when the initial one expires, so this could go on forever,” he said. It’s basically a blank check for states to raise truck weights — that’s huge.”
Owner operators also cite safety concerns in opposing efforts to raise truck weight limits.
“I’ve hauled for relief efforts before, and if it’s strictly about an emergency relief situation, that’s fine,” said Lee Schmitt, an owner-operator and spokesman for CDL Drivers Unlimited, a truck driver advocacy group.
“But now you’re potentially giving carte blanche to anyone with a trailer to haul heavier loads in equipment that may not be able to handle it. It’s also a safety issue — heavier loads require more distance to start and stop, and not having experience with that can make the roads less safe for everyone.”
Several other proposals aimed at easing truck weight restrictions are also pending in Congress, including a voluntary pilot program that would allow states to increase truck weights on federal interstates from 80,000 pounds to up to 91,000 pounds on six axles, and a proposal that would allow weight increases to 88,000 for certain auto haulers.
Jeffery chism
I been driving truck for long time I pass the test and still don’t have my CDL license they put my information in wrong now am stuck here I would be good to do a way with CDL license been good if you drive truck with regular license would have more driver in the trucking businesses
Grumpy
So California road blocks trucks at every opportunity. And now wants to support an act to waive limitations to benefit them?? When you welcome trucks on a regular basis, then and only then, will your thoughts or opinions make a difference to us. I hope you all run out of everything!!!
Paul Lewis
Raise the weight limit to eighty four or eighty five thousand . And do away with the axle weight limit
Geno
The concept of this law is to respond quicker to emergencies. Currently Governors can allow additional weight on state routes but not on interstates which happens during floods, tornados…disasters. Running through towns instead of interstates is slower. In an emergency wouldn’t you want to get the critical supplies there as fast as you can? States can analyze routes for specific products as well.
Jim
1. Road repairs are already backed up; so there is your obvious indicator as to the motive of this bill (transport logistics->money)
2. Railcar weights are being increased too. This follows after train wrecks due to haphazard train conditions (including preventable ones like hauling chemicals long distances, or lack of track maintenance)
So since this isn’t for the betterment of infrastructure and logistics and is just a glorified way to pack more onto an already crowded truck at the risk of drivers without making changes to the truck or roads, I guess this is another “let’s see what happens!” situation.
Where is the foresight?
Robert Norton
I.
Live in Michigan, the more axles, the more you can haul up to a 180000 pounds for doubles look at our roads.
They are horrific. The more weight the more the roads are gonna fall apart, we can’t keep up.
I’ve been driving forty Years and seen the shape of some of these Trucks maintenance is not a priority with some Companies But higher profits are there only concern. So I believe raising the weight limits should not happen at any Time I also believe That extending the time a work An extreme emergencies should be driver’s choice And not a forced dispatch.
Angelo Baldin
If it’s something that we definitely don’t need is a new regulation given mo leverage to any company about extra load weight with an unfair market for us O/O. A full 53 dry van with a load of 40.000 + lbs it’s paying us the same as a partial liad with less than 5.000 lbs. What we need is a fixed rate base on weight, distance, fuel price and cost of operation; once that is set everything will be ok and everyone will make money and other thing too is lumper services should be responsibility of customer receiving the products not the drivers, detention should be a standard fee across the board from the after one hour parked against a door waiting to be load or unload since no one will work for free (we should not have), every driver should be under ELD andno exceptions but with a different regulation. Since we cannot work past 70 hours a driver will be on personal convenience every single time that a trailer is absolutely empty and or no trailer is with the truck. If a driver can’t adjust their equipment brake if not a certified mechanic why that driver have to be on duty driving when bringing the equipment into a repair facility? And this regulations should be applied only for the Single Owner Operator, if you are a mega carrier and or operating more than 1 truck these regulations will not apply for you.
Cory D Mullis
As long as it makes more money 🤑 for the fat cat’s is the only reason this is being done ! Don’t let them fool ya. 10,000lb doesn’t sound like much but believe me 10,000lb added to a already fully loaded truck at 80,000lb , makes a big difference ! with 15yrs experience