An uncertain summer

Although it feels like the transportation industry has been in a state of turmoil for some time now, this summer may set a new record. There are a couple of reasons for that.

One has to do with an issue I've written about on at least two occasions—the push to allow larger, six-axle trucks on the nation's highways. Dozens of studies have been done over the past few years on the likely impact of such a move. The results show overwhelmingly that the addition of a sixth axle would enable a truck to carry a heavier load with no negative impact on safety, fuel costs, the environment, or highway infrastructure. But that hasn't kept the effort to raise truck weight limits from becoming stalled in the legislative process.

Last year, John Mica, the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, included in the latest transportation funding bill a provision allowing the states to increase weight limits on their roads to 97,000 pounds from 80,000 for trucks with a sixth axle. Unfortunately, this provision did not make the final cut; instead, the new legislation, known as MAP-21, directed the secretary of transportation to conduct yet another study, with a report due to Congress in two years.

The first public information session was held on May 31, with three more sessions planned. At the session, the Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association stepped forward to object for safety reasons, citing the recent collapse of the Interstate 5 bridge in Washington state (even though it's pretty clear the bridge collapsed because a truck struck the overhead structure). More objections are sure to follow.

Then, shortly before his death on June 3, N.J. Sen. Frank Lautenberg introduced legislation that would extend the **ital{current} truck weight limits to the entire 220,000-mile national highway system. If passed, this bill would of course preclude the 97,000-pound loads. In a statement announcing the legislation, Lautenberg cited polls showing that the majority of Americans oppose heavier trucks. The Coalition for Transportation Productivity (CTP), a group of about 200 shippers and affiliates lobbying for the deployment of bigger trucks, immediately went on record charging that the poll asked "biased questions" and didn't take into consideration that all of the heavier trucks would be required to have a sixth axle to increase stability and braking power. Who knows how this one will turn out?

As if that were not enough, as I write this, the new truck driver hours-of-service (HOS) rule is scheduled to take effect on July 1, and it is still unclear how the regulations will impact motor carrier costs and capacity. The American Trucking Associations (ATA) has asked the U.S. Court of Appeals in Washington, D.C., to overturn the proposed changes to the rule, but at press time, the court had not yet issued a decision.

The ATA and other organizations have also asked the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration to delay enforcement at least until the court reached a decision, but the agency rejected the request. So unless something has happened by the time you read this, the rules are effective.

One thing is certain, however. The cost of truck service is going up. ABF, YRC, and UPS Freight have announced general rate increases of 5.9 percent, and other carriers are expected to follow suit. YRC cited new technologies and processes necessary to manage new HOS regulations as one of the reasons for its increase. (This may be true, but we see similar increases almost every year. The UPS and ABF press releases made no attempt to justify the increase.) All this notwithstanding, most industry observers predict the new rules will result in productivity reductions—the extent of which remains to be seen.

Bottom line: This summer and for the remainder of the year, we won't see larger trucks on the roads. But we will see higher costs—and depending on the economy, capacity issues as well.