6
S. Hrg. 103-864
TRUCK LENGTHS AND SAFEH
' 4. C 73/7: S. HRG, 103-864
ruck Lengths and Safety^ S.Hrg. 10...
HEARING
BEFORP] tup:
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SP]SSION
SP:I^EMBER 14, 1994
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
. * fl- - .. ,_
U.S. GOVKRNME.VT PRINTING OFFICE
82-953 CC WASHINGTON : 1994
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office, Washington. DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-046344-0
^
\^ S. Hrg. 103-864
TRUCK LENGTHS AND SAFETY
l.C 73/7; S. HRG, 103-B64
k Lengths and Safety/ S.Hr§. 10...
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON SURFACE TRANSPORTATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE,
SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED THIRD CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
SEl^EMBER 14, 1994
Printed for the use of the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation
U.S. govp:rnme.\t printing office
82-953 CC WASHINGTON : 1994
For sale by the U.S. Government Printing Office
Superintendent of Documents. Congressional Sales Office. Washington. DC 20402
ISBN 0-16-046344-0
COMMITTEE ON COMMERCE, SCIENCE, AND TRANSPORTATION
ERNEST F. HOLLINGS. South Carolina, Chairman
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
WENDELL H. FORD, Kentucky
J. JAMES EXON. Nebraska
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia
JOHN F. KERRY, Massachusetts
JOHN B. BREAUX. Louisiana
RICHARD H. BRYAN, Nevada
CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
HARLAN MATHEWS, Tennessee
Kevin G. CUKTIN, Chief Counsel and Staff Director
Jonathan Chambers, Republican Staff Director
JOHN C. DANFORTH, Missouri
BOB PACKWOOD. Oregon
LARRY PRESSLER, South DakoU
TED STEVENS, Alaska
JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona
CONRAD BURNS. Montana
Sl^DE GORTON, Washington
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation
J. JAMES EXON, Nebraska, Chairman
JOHN D. ROCKEFELLER IV, West Virginia
DANIEL K. INOUYE, Hawaii
JOHN B. BREAUX, Louisiana
CHARLES S. ROBB, Virginia
BYRON L. DORGAN, North Dakota
HARLAN MATHEWS, Tennessee
KAY BAILEY HUTCHISON, Texas
BOB PACKWOOD, Oregon
CONRAD BURNS, Montana
TRENT LOTT, Mississippi
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
(II)
CONTENTS
Page
Opening statement of Senator Exon 1
Prepared statement 2
Opening statement of Senator Hollings 1
Opening statement of Senator Hutchison 22
List of Witnesses
Claybrook, Joan, Cochar, Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways (CRASH)
and President, Public Citizen, prepared statement of 45
Donaldson, Dr. Gerald A., Assistant Director for Highway Safety, Advocates
for Highway and Auto Safety 29
Prepared statement 32
Donohue, Thomas J., President and Chief Executive Officer, American Truck-
ing Associations 62
Prepared statement 65
Konz, Kay E., Nebraska Volunteer Coordiantor, Citizens for Reliable and
Safe Highways (CRASH) 42
Prepared statement 44
Mead, Kenneth M., Director, Transportation Issues, Resources, Community
and Economic Development Division, General Accounting OfTice 12
Prepared statement 16
Slater, Hon. Rodney E., Administrator, Federal Highway Administration 2
Prepared statement 'y- 5
Appendix
Eisenhart, Earl, Vice President, Policy and Government Affairs, National
Private Truck Council, prepared statement of 77
Harper, Edwin L., President, Association of American Railroads, prepared
statement of 107
Hoemann, Warren E , Vice President — Government Relations, Yellow Corp.,
letter from, to Senator Exon, dated September 9, 1994 105
National Industrial Transportation League, prepared statement of 75
Questions asked by Senator Exon and answers thereto by:
GAO 85
Mr. Donaldson 92
Mr. Donohue 101
Ms. Konz 96
Mr. Slater 81
Questions asked by Senator Hollings and answers thereto by:
GAO 84
Mr. Donaldson 92
Mr. Donohue 99
Ms. Konz 96
Mr. Slater 80
Questions asked by Senator Hollings and Senator Exon and answers thereto
by Mr. Donaldson 87
Questions asked by Senator Hutchison and answers thereto by:
Mr. Parker 84
Mr. Slater 81
Wyland, Darryl L., Senior Vice President, Public and Government Relations,
American Automobile Association, prepared statement of 110
(III)
TRUCK LENGTHS AND SAFETY
WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 1994
U.S. Senate,
Subcommittee on Surface Transportation of the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:15 a.m., in room
SR-253, Russell Senate Office Building, Hon. J. James Exon
(chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Staff members assigned to this hearing: Clyde J. Hart, senior
counsel, and William Clyburn, Jr., staff counsel; and Gerri Lynn
Hall, minority professional staff member.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR EXON
Senator ExoN. I want to welcome you and tell you that any
statements you have will be made a part of the record at this point,
without objection.
I would ask each of you please proceed to summarize your state-
ments, and then we will have some additional questions. Mr.
Chairman, your comments, please.
OPEMNG STATEMENT OF SENATOR ROLLINGS
The Chairman. Today, the Surface Transportation Subcommittee
will receive testimony on the relationship, if any, between the
length of trucks on the Nation's highways and traffic safety.
According to the National Highway Traffic Safety Administra-
tion, more than 4,800 people were killed in accidents involving
large trucks in the United States in 1993. In other words, one out
of eight traffic fatalities last year resulted from a collision involving
a large truck.
This hearing is a step in determining whether, as some contend,
the increased length of a truck increases its susceptibility to acci-
dents and, if so, whether that susceptibility argues for a federally
imposed "cap" of 53 feet on truck lengths on the national highway
system. To others, there is no correlation between truck lengtn and
an increase in accidents and hence no reason for any additional cap
on the length of such trucks. Those who hold this viewpoint also
emphasize the benefits of the use of longer trucks and longer com-
bination vehicles to the Nation's economy, such as increased ship-
ping capacity and lower shipping rates.
The Commerce Committee has asked both sides to elaborate on
their views and specify the evidence supporting those views. In ad-
dition, the General Accounting Office, which has authored a study
on longer combination vehicles, and the Federal Highway Adminis-
(1)
tration, which has related studies underway, will give the commit-
tee the benefit of their research to date.
The issue is importEint. The information received today will help
us to determine what action, if any, is necessary in this area. I look
forward to the testimony of the witnesses.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator EXON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As I had indicated
earlier, I repeat for you and the panel which will follow, we have
a very busy schedule on and off the floor of the Senate today, and
we must move this hearing along just as quickly as we possibly
can.
[The prepared statement of Senator Exon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Senator Exon
The next order of business for the subcommittee is to consider the safety implica-
tions of truck lengths.
As chairman of this subcommittee, my first priority has been safety.
During consideration of the Intermodal Surface Transportation EfTiciency Act also
known as ISTEA, I offered successful legislation to freeze the length of longer com-
bination vehicles (LCVs). After consulting safety experts, I was concerned that LCVs
could pose serious safety problems, especially in crowded interstate corridors. The
driving public also overwhelmingly agreed. I believe that the LCV freeze has worked
well.
This hearing will consider the recently completed report by the General Account-
ing Office on the safety and efficiency of LCVs as well as proposals which would
afiect the length of single trailers.
Over the years, there has been a trend in some states towards longer and heavier
trucks and trailers. The standard fifty-three foot truck length is being stretched to
nearly sixty feet in some states. This trend poses serious questions about the safety
of these vehicles, how they mix with increasingly smaller and lighter passenger ve-
hicles as well as the effect longer and heavier trucks have on the nation's highway
infrastructure. In addition, the private sector has built a very efficient intermodal
network based on certain standardized trailer and container lengths. Will that in-
vestment be made obsolete by a rush to longer and heavier trailers?
I welcome the testimony of today's witnesses. All written testimony will be in-
cluded in the record as if read and all witnesses are asked to summarize their state-
ments to ensure sufficient time for questions and answers.
Senator ExoN. So, we will be keeping our questions short. Also,
we hope you will keep your statements as short as possible.
And, if we can come to order, we will begin by calling on the
Honorable Rodney E. Slater for his testimony. Welcome, Mr. Slater.
We are glad to have you here.
STATEMENT OF HON. RODNEY E. SLATER, ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION; ACCOMPANIED BY
GEORGE L. REAGLE, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR
MOTOR CARRIERS, FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION;
AND GEORGE L. PARKER, ASSOCIATE ADMINISTRATOR FOR
RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT, NATIONAL HIGHWAY TRAF-
FIC SAFETY ADMINISTRATION
Mr. Slater. Thank you, Senator. It is a pleasure to be here.
Mr. Chairman, I am pleased to be here with my colleagues and
with others to discuss vital issues involving the safe operation of
our Nation's highways.
With me today, we have Greorge Reagle, who is with the Federal
Highway Administration. He is our Associate Administrator for
Motor Carriers.
Also with me, to my left and your right, is George Parker, who
is with the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration. He is
the NHTSA Associate Administrator for Research and Develop-
ment.
I would like at the outset, Mr. Chairman, to salute you for your
diligent efforts to improve the safety of our Nation's transportation
system.
And I would like also to note that the recently signed Hazardous
Materials Transportation Authorization Act of 1994 is but the most
recent example of that kind of commitment.
I would also Hke to say that as we talk about highway safety,
we at the Department of Transportation view it as our No. 1 prior-
ity.
And even as we promote initiatives like the National Highway
System, we do it from the vantage point of understanding how im-
portant it is going to be to highway safety.
As you know, the National Highway System is moving through
the Congress. It has already passed the House overwhelmingly. It
is now before the Senate.
This System of roughly 160,000 miles will carry over 40 percent
of the Nation's highway traffic, with 70 percent of the Nation's
truck freight traffic.
So, as we talk about this issue of weights and size as relates to
trucks and motor carriers, we are talking about also the impor-
tance of improvements to our roadways that will help facilitate the
movement, the efficient and safe movement, of those vehicles on
our system.
Now turning specifically to the issue of truck size and weight, let
me say that the relationship between truck length and safety and
highway investment requirements and economic productivity is
close. All of these items are inextricably tied one to the other.
Since in practice truck length issues cannot be separated from
those involving truck weight, my remarks will cover both truck size
and weight.
As detailed in my full statement that I will summarize here, we
do not presently possess all of the necessary data and other infor-
mation that will allow us to completely answer all the questions
that will be raised.
But clearly with a commitment to safety and with the recognition
of the important role that trucks play in our economy to keep
America moving, we are gathering that kind of data, analyzing it,
and will be in a position in the near future to be a bit more respon-
sive to the specific questions that I am sure are out there to be an-
swered.
Truck size and weight issues are extremely complex. They relate
not only to local. State, and national economic performance, but to
questions of safety and management as relates to our highway in-
frastructure.
A basic characteristic of highway networks is that automobiles,
trucks, and buses must share a common roadway. The combination
of large freight vehicles with smaller, lighter passenger cars causes
special safety risk. Large vehicles impose great demands on their
drivers and those with whom they must share the roads.
Their size and handling characteristics demand consideration in
the design of our roadways. We beheve that the National Highway
System, which will allow us to focus on our Nation's most impor-
tant roadways, as well as our emphasis and use of IVHS tech-
nologies that I have discussed in great detail in my statement, hold
great promise in addressing the safety and congestion concerns as-
sociated with freight vehicles.
Also, we believe that the increasing number of long-haul ship-
ments that occur on our rail system will also help us to deal with
this growing concern.
Good truck size and weight policies should ensure, we believe,
safe and efficient freight movement on our Nation's highways and
intermodal systems. More and more, U.S. businesses are turning to
intermodal solutions to address their transportation needs. I would
like to mention that I am working closely with the Federal Rail-
road Administrator Jolene Molitoris on how our Nation's highway
and rail systems can better be used to meet our transportation
needs and concerns.
In recent years, though, this issue of truck size and weight con-
cerns has been dealt with in many different contexts.
Previous studies typically have been focused on a limited set of
specific truck size and weight options; investigated in sort of a hap-
hazard or disjointed fashion.
I would like to note, though, that the most recent study by the
General Accounting Office, in August 1994, did examine this issue
in a somewhat more detailed and comprehensive way, dealing with
both the economic and safety issues as relates to longer combina-
tion vehicles. Ken Mead is here today to talk about the specifics of
that study.
Even though the GAO study concluded that economic benefits of
extending LCV operations appear to outweigh added infrastructure
costs, it did go on to note that safety questions concerning longer
combination vehicles are less easily answered.
It is our desire, Mr. Chairman, to get to some of those answers.
That is why, on June 14 of this year, when I testified before the
House Committee on Public Works and Transportation, I an-
nounced a proactive, comprehensive effort on the part of the Fed-
eral Highway Administration and the Department of Transpor-
tation to address this issue in a very comprehensive way.
It is the first initiative of this kind in more than 30 years, even
though, during that interim period, the importance of trucks in
moving freight and goods in our economy has grown significantly.
We believe that viewing these issues in a broader context, as re-
lates to safety, intermodalism, and economic productivity goals, will
give us a better understanding of how to address the various truck
size and weight concerns, viewing them in total, rather than deal-
ing with it in a disjointed and haphazard fashion.
Already, we are establishing a multimodal advisory group, which
will review plans and products. This advisory group includes rep-
resentatives from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administra-
tion, and the Federal Railroad Administration.
Also, we will engage in extensive public outreach. The effort will
have three phases. The first phase, which is already underway, will
seek to synthesize information from various studies and ongoing re-
search concerning various truck size and weight issues. All of this
is outlined in my full statement.
We hope that this effort will be complete by early 1995. We will
then move on to the second phase, which will allow us to use these
findings to make a preliminary evaluation of the various policy op-
tions that we have identified in previous major studies on truck
size and weight policy, as well as to consider new options that are
before us.
And in the third phase, we will extend this analysis to a greater
understanding and focus on the demand for freight transportation
that is expected to occur on our transportation system in both the
long and short terms.
In closing, let me say, Mr. Chairman, that commodity movements
have changed in terms of their location, mode and sensitivity, and
we must consider change in responding to these new demands.
NHTSA has raised many issues concerning the braking systems
of these vehicles that are helping to keep America moving.
It is our belief, also, that this extensive comprehensive analysis
of the various reports and efforts that have occurred over the past
30 vears, will give us a better understanding, better data, to deal
ana grapple with an issue that is becoming more and more impor-
tant. As we engage in an economic war, if you will, that puts us
on the international stage, we are forced to look for greater effi-
ciencies and efforts to make our system more efficient and effective.
And we believe that this hearing is important in that regard. Mr.
Chairman, we are very pleased to be a part of this hearing today,
as we discuss this and other very important issues as relates to
keeping America moving, keeping America competitive.
Thank you, sir.
Senator ExoN. Mr. Slater, thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Slater follows:]
Prepared Statement of Rodney E. Slater
Thank youl Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to be here this morning on behalf of the
Department of Transportation to discuss a number of issues involving tbb safe oper-
ation of our Nation's highways. With me are Mr. George Reagle, the Federal High-
way Administration's Associate Administrator for Motor Carriers, and Mr. George
Parker, the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration's Associate Adminis-
trator for Research and Development.
Before I begin, I would like to take a moment to salute you, Mr. Chairman, for
your diligent work to improve the safety of our Nation's transportation system. The
recent signed Hazardous Materials Transportation Authorization Act of 1994 pro-
vides an excellent example of your commitment to safety and productivity. This Act
not only ensures the continued safe trc^nsportation of hazardous materials, but also
eliminates outmoded economic regulation of the trucking industry.
I would also like to take a moment to commend Senator John Danforth, the Rank-
ing Republican member of thi- Committee and a tireless champion of transportation
safety. When Senator Danforth retires at the end of his term he will leave behind
many great accomplishments in the transportation arena, such as his contributions
to the success of the Motor Carrier Safetv Assistance Program, the Commercial
Driver's License Program, and the Drug and Alcohol Testing Program.
THE NATIONAL HIGHWAY SYSTEM
The issues we will discuss this morning are of particular concern to the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), especially in light of Congress' current consider-
ation of legislation to designate the National Highway System (NHS). Approval of
the NHS is the FHWA's highest surface transportation priority this year. We urge
the Senate to act on S. 1887, the National Highway System Designation Act of 1994,
which was approved by the Environment and Public Works Committee last month.
This is a "clean" bill — it contains no extraneous provisions, but merely designates
the NHS and provides for Secretarial modifications to the System.
While the NHS, as currently proposed, includes only 4 percent of this country's
public roads, it carries 40 percent of the Nation's highway traffic, 70 percent of the
commercial truck traffic, and 80 percent of the tourist trafiic.
Efficient, effective, and safe highway systems play a critical role in the U.S. econ-
omy since nearly all the essentials of modem life travel on them, whether in the
delivery of supplies to production plants or shipment of goods to retail outlets.
Transportation is an indispensable foundation of commerce as it provides access to
raw materials, labor and mariiets. Maintaining and improving highway and motor
carrier transportation services in a safe environment for the traveling public en-
sures entrepreneurs the freedom to adapt quickly to changing market conditions
with confidence that the spatial barriers between markets can be overcome.
Highway freight transport policy can be fashioned to improve the Nation's long-
term economic prospects and vitality. As in all public policy decisions affecting the
interests of the public at large, a balance must be struck among the many goals.
The relationship between transportation and economic development is obvious; it is
clearly tied to the industrial and employment base. We know that good, dependable
transportation is an important factor in any region's growth potential. The U.S.
economy as a whole is highly integrated and is becoming more closely tied to the
global economy. To retain and expand its economic vitality and competitive position,
America must ensure that its producers and carriers have quality access to their
markets.
Last April I had the opportunity to travel through 14 States in 14 days on a
3,500-mile road tour. Our tour started in Buffalo, New York, and wound its way
south to the Mexican border at Laredo, Texas. As I traveled on mostly non-inter-
state roads and mainly on the NHS, I saw firsthand the condition of our Nation's
highways. The purpose of my trip was to look, to listen, and to learn. I met with
officials and I talked with highway users. I saw the critical importance of a highway
network focused on moving people and goods. One thing I spent considerable time
on was the area of motor carriers; for example, we stopped at the Flatrock, Michi-
gan, truck weigh station, which is a major component of the Intelligent Vehicle-
Highway System (IVHS) "Advantage 1-75" project. This undertaking, which involves
six States and the province of Ontario, will use IVHS technology to expedite the
clearance and movement of commercial vehicles within and across State lines and
international borders.
The ability of all vehicles, including trucks, to move efficiently, safely, and, there-
fore, reliably is a critical component of the success of our transportation system and
the economy as a whole. We believe that approval of the NHS, which focuses Fed-
eral resources on an integrated network of highways linked to key intermodal6
points, is essential to America's productivity in the 21st century.
THE NHS AND SAFETY
While freight moves by all modes — highway, rail, water, and air — trucks represent
a vital component of almost every delivery of cargo to its ultimate destination. Two
statistics help to illustrate the importance of trucking to our economy: trucking rep-
resents 71 percent of the Nation's freight bill and 42 percent of the total tonnage
hauled by all modes.
Because one of the principal reasons for this hearing today is to discuss the safety
of longer commercial motor vehicles, I would like to address generally the relation-
ship of the NHS to motor vehicle safety.
Recent years have seen a remarkable improvement in motor vehicle safety. In
1992, the number of fatalities on our Nation's highways fell below 40,000 for the
first time in 30 years. Though last year's toll was slightly above 40,000, and though
either figure is still too high, these numbers are remarkable when one considers
that road traffic has tripled in that same time. Although the number of miles trav-
eled on American roads has skyrocketed, the fatality rate — that is, fatalities per 100
million vehicle miles traveled — has dropped to a record low. If the rate were the
same today as it was in 1956 we would be losing 134,000 people a year.
During this same period, heavy truck safety has improved dramatically. Clearly,
though, safety problems involving heavy trucks are worthy of discussion and our
concentrated attention. In 1982, tne fatality rate for these vehicles was 4.9 per 100
million vehicle miles of travel. By 1992, however, this rate had fallen to 2.9 per 100