Transcript Wisconsin Truck Size and Weight Study

Wisconsin Truck Size and Weight Study
presented to
Audience Title
presented by
Name of Presentor
Wisconsin Department of Transportation
Date
Wisconsin’s Freight Needs
Leading industries rely on goods
movement
• Manufacturing (i.e. Machinery)
• Agriculture
• Forest Products
• Mineral Extraction
• Paper
• Dairy Products
Major growth
• Ethanol
• Wind Energy Components
Additional port traffic
1
Legislative Rumblings about TSW
States accomodating heavier trucks on state/local roads, beginning to
pressure Feds
Growing recognition of international progress (Compared to others, U.S. is
underutilizing infrastructure, overutilizing energy resources)
Next transportation authorization bill discussions in the works
Proposals (such as H.R. 1799) for 6-axle, 97,000 pound trucks on
Interstate System
80,000 lbs.
CURRENT HEAVIEST ALLOWED DIVISIBLE LOAD ON
INTERSTATE SYSTEM
2
97,000 lbs.
PROPOSED HEAVIEST ALLOWED DIVISIBLE LOAD ON
INTERSTATE SYSTEM
WI Truck Size and Weight Study Overview
HISTORY
KEY QUESTIONS
Wisconsin Legislature
Special Committee on
Highway Weight Limits
• Influenced by Minnesota
Truck Size & Weight Study
WI Assembly Bill 238  WI
Act 20 (10/26/07)
• Requires Department of
Transportation to study
vehicle size and weight
limits
Economy
3
Should changes be made to
Wisconsin’s TSW laws?
What impacts would changes to TSW
laws have on the State’s roads and
bridges, regulatory and enforcement
capabilities, administrative processes,
and freight transportation modes?
What specific requirements need to be
met by any vehicles operating under
modified size/weight standards?
Safety
& Costs
Understanding Wisconsin’s TSW Laws
Weight and Size Limits
Weight Limits
Class A Highways
• 80,000 lbs. Gross Vehicle Weight (GVW)
• 20,000 lbs. GW for any single axle
• 34,000 lbs. for consecutive sets of tandem axles
• 11,000 lbs. GW per wheel
Bridge Weight limits posted by management agency
(frequently local gov’t)
Size Limits
Single Unit Trucks
All Vehicles
8’6”
Tractor-Trailer Combinations
65’ (see exceptions)
40’
48’
*53’
13’6”
4
Tractors w/ Double Bottoms
*Length from kingpin to axle must be < 43’
75’ (see exceptions)
28’6”
28’6”
TSW Laws in Neighboring States
Key Findings
Similar height, width, and length
restrictions
Some differences in allowable GVW
• Michigan allows much heavier
trucks
• Minnesota moving towards heavier
trucks
• Illinois has lower weight limits on
secondary highways (73,280
pounds)
Other states have fewer load-specific
permits written into laws
5
Overweight fines higher in surrounding
states
Heavy Vehicle Technology Trends
Weigh-in-Motion
Implementation of newer /
innovative technologies
has been a slow process
• Low replacement rates
for large trucks
• Affordability issues for
smaller companies
Geo-Fencing
Technology categories
• Pavement protection
devices
• Safety enhancing
technologies
• Enforcement/compliance
systems
6
Vehicle Safety Features
On-board Scales
Changing Business Practices in WI
Trends Affecting Load Sizes and Weights
Economic pressures
Changes in supply chain management
Railroad capacity and business practices
Congestion at terminals and border crossings
Infrastructure project lead times
Urban congestion
Competing land uses
7
Changes in production locations in certain
industries
Current Safety Issues
Truck driver training and experience
Large Truck Crash Rate by County (2006)
Limited enforcement capacity
Standardization of postings and permits
Increasing vehicle size disparity
Deployment of assistive technologies
Integration of safety conditions (driver
performance, fleet performance, etc.)
into special permit management
conditions
8
Source: Wisconsin Bureau of Transportation Safety
Public Agency Outreach Conclusions
Category
Issue Summary

General Approach
Changes to TSW laws should:
 Be fair, equitable, and understandable
 Examine what current and future infrastructure allows
 Consider impacts on other freight modes

Keep Wisconsin’s economy health & competitive

Emphasize link between infrastructure spending and
economic health of industry

Current TSW laws limit port traffic due to complexity
Economic Development

Current enforcement tools (level of enforcement and low
fines) foster an “incentive for noncompliance”
Enforcement
Safety
9

Enforcement power should be increased

Analyze effect of large trucks on highway safety

Evaluate safety risk for bridges

Consider requirements for truck safety countermeasures
Public Agency Outreach Conclusions
Category
Issue Summary

Designate heavy truck corridors (to limit county / local road use)

Evaluate bridges, geometric design of intersections

Federal leadership is needed for significant TSW changes

Consider impact of US-41’s conversion to an Interstate highway

Ensure direct linkage between commercial vehicle revenues and
covering the costs of heavy trucks’ impact on the transportation
system

Transportation funds should be invested into transportation
infrastructure with a focus on preservation/rehabilitation of the
existing system
Infrastructure
Federal-State
Revenue
10
Private Sector Outreach Conclusions
Issue Summary
11

INTERSTATE HARMONIZATION - Any TSW changes (including OS/OW permitting) should be
harmonized across state boundaries

INTERSTATE HIGHWAY ACCESS - More productive truck configurations should be allowed on the
Interstate system, which can accommodate the heavier loads

REVENUE RETENTION - Revenue from permitting should be reinvested in bridge and other freight
truck-related improvements along key routes

EQUITABLE CHANGES AND EXCEPTIONS - TSW changes should be equitable across industries
and existing exceptions should be preserved

GREEN POLICY - The State should promote TSW changes as “green” policy (reduced carbon,
lower fuel consumption, and less congestion due to lower numbers of trucks)

IMPROVED INFORMATION - Information about roads, bridges, and related information should
be increased and available on the WisDOT website
Heavier Configurations for Analysis
6-axle 90,000 pound Semi
6a TST 90
6-axle 98,000 pound Semi
6a TST 98
7-axle 97,000 pound Semi
7a TST 97
12
7-axle 80,000 pound Single Unit
7a SU 80
45’
8-axle 108,000 pound Semi
8a D 108
Straight Truck plus Pup Trailer (98k)
6a STT 98
Benefit-Cost Analysis Methodology
GOAL: Estimate the Impacts of Potential Changes to TSW Law
• Truck Traffic Effects of New Configurations
• Goods Movement Costs
− Truck operating cost effects
• Pavement Costs
Benefits
− Change in ESAL miles
− Potential adjustments in maintenance
assumptions to customize
• Bridge Costs
− Replacement/Posting, Fatigue, New Bridges
• Crash Costs
− Based on changes in truck VMT by configuration type
• Congestion Costs
13
− Savings from potential reduced truck VMT
Costs
Estimating Safety Impacts
Minimizing Crash Risk
Heavier Vehicles =
Slightly Higher
Crash Rates
14
More
Productivity =
Reduced
Exposure
Estimating Bridge Costs
Bridge Considerations - Axle Spacing vs. Axle Weight
15
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Annual Benefits and Costs Non-Interstates
Public Benefits &
Impacts
User Benefits
Net Benefits
Configuration
Transport
Savings
Pavements
Safety
Congestion
Federal Bridge
Forumula
Bridge
Costs for
TSW
Config
Baseline
0
0
0
0
0
(55.50)
0
(55.50)
6a TST 90
5.50
2.57
0.46
0.92
(2.60)
(55.50)
6.85
(48.65)
Y
7a TST 97
6.27
3.87
0.70
0.85
(3.70)
(55.50)
7.99
(47.51)
Y
7a SU 80
2.46
0.40
0.11
0.08
(2.70)
(55.50)
0.35
(55.15)
Y
8a D 108
3.42
3.34
0.46
0.49
(7.20)
(55.50)
0.51
(54.99)
N
6a TST 98
19.19
1.10
1.52
1.89
(10.20)
(55.50)
13.50
(42.00)
N
6a STT 98
2.19
0.03
0.09
0.06
(5.10)
(55.50)
(2.73)
(58.23)
Y
Y
Baseline
Bridge
Costs
With
TSW
Bridge
Costs
Only
All Values in $ Millions per Year (assumes operation on non-Interstates only)
16
With All
Bridge
Costs
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Annual Benefits and Costs Including Interstates
Public Benefits &
Impacts
User Benefits
Net Benefits
Configuration
Transport
Savings
Pavements
Safety
Congestion
Federal Bridge
Forumula
Bridge
Costs for
TSW
Config
Baseline
0
0
0
0
0
(55.50)
0
(55.50)
6a TST 90
36.64
14.65
3.48
3.44
(2.60)
(55.50)
55.61
0.11
Y
7a TST 97
41.83
19.91
4.43
4.08
(3.70)
(55.50)
66.55
11.05
Y
7a SU 80
9.83
1.53
0.53
0.09
(2.70)
(55.50)
9.28
(46.22)
Y
8a D 108
22.77
16.76
2.90
1.65
(7.20)
(55.50)
36.88
(18.62)
N
6a TST 98
127.94
10.19
9.40
11.03
(10.20)
(55.50)
148.36
92.86
N
6a STT 98
14.61
0.32
0.68
0.26
(5.10)
(55.50)
10.77
(44.73)
Y
Y
Baseline
Bridge
Costs
With
TSW
Bridge
Costs
Only
All Values in $ Millions per Year (assumes operation on Interstates)
17
With All
Bridge
Costs
Interstate TSW Laws
Impacts on Cost Savings
Percent Change in Heavy Truck VMT on Wisconsin’s Highways
If operable on nonInterstate highways
If operable on All
Highways
6a TST 90
-0.06%
-0.40%
6a TST 98
-0.18%
-1.21%
7a TST 97
-0.07%
-0.50%
7a SU 80
-0.01%
-0.02%
8a D 108
-0.06%
-0.40%
6a STT 98
-0.01%
-0.04%
Configuration
18
Policy Directions
Policies for Consideration
Administer performance-based permit
program
Develop a comprehensive truck crash study
Work with Federal government to explore
the potential for TSW changes on the
Interstate System
Review OS/OW permit process
Increase fines for commercial vehicle
size/weight violations
Increase resources for TSW enforcement
20
Review non-permitted weight exceptions
Wisconsin Policy Implementation Actions
Report Findings
• No recommendations for heavier/larger trucks on WI
non-Interstate highways at this time
• Publishing report as an informational resource
• Ongoing coordination with Wisconsin legislature
Internal Freight Issue Management
• Development of internal Freight Issues Committee
• Exploring development of external Freight Advisory
Committee
• Participate in AASHTO discussion with the federal
government concerning weight limits on Interstates
Safety
21
• Initiating Long Truck Safety Study
Wisconsin Policy Implementation Actions (cont.)
Oversize/Overweight Permitting
• Developing bi-state OS/OW permitting program
with Minnesota
• Studying programmatic changes to enhance
permitting issuance and monitoring (focus on wind
tower shipments)
SWEF Inspection Technologies
• Implementing enforcement technologies such as
automated vehicle identification (AVI)
CVISN and Related CV Technologies
• Reviewing CVISN Program to identify
“mainstreaming” opportunities
Performance Measurement
22
• Reviewing mechanisms to keep rules current,
respond to industry
Questions
23