7

accomplishments and plan future actions. We hope this effort in our own back yard will serve as a model for other cities.

Within our own national motor carrier safety programs, we are raising the

priority of both bus safety and hazardous materials carriers. These classes of carriers will enjoy our heightened attention.

The Administration has requested full authorized funding of the Motor Carrier Safety Assistance Program, or MCSAP, as a component of the

Administration's desire to fully fund the core programs of the Intermodal

Surface Transportation Efficiency Act in FY 1995.

We have finished the first phase of our "zero-based review" of our motor carrier regulations, which seeks to take a fresh look at our rulemaking process, to find out what the major problems are, and to create a new set of regulations primarily based on analysis, research, and uniformity.

We have issued alcohol and drug testing regulations, which cover over 550,000 motor carriers and over 6 million drivers, both inter- and intrastate. In cooperation with officials of the Maryland Department of Transportation, a few weeks ago we unveiled the "Sharing the Road" campaign with the distribution of over 500 TV public service announcements, 1,000 radio announcements, and nearly 2,000 press kits containing campaign information and print announcements.

Lastly, we have issued important regulations on: State compliance with the 22 provisions of the Commercial Motor Vehicle Act of 1986 and with regard to sanctions for drivers who violate an out-of-service order -- that is, move their vehicle before the needed repairs have been made.

Mr. Chairman, our changes create a program that is preventive in nature, elevates the human part of the equation to a higher level and uses technology as our partner in achieving a more effective and efficient program.

Finally, Mr. Chairman, on an issue related to highway safety, yesterday Secretary Peña announced and delivered to the Hill proposed legislation and a comprehensive, multimodal Action Plan to reduce rail-highway grade crossing and trespasser accidents and fatalities.

The proposed Rail-Highway Grade Crossing Safety Act of 1994 would give States additional options in dealing with grade crossing hazards. Key provisions include

(1) providing cash incentives to local governments that close dangerous crossings or that examine grade crossing hazards on a corridor basis, (2) permitting States to use 100 percent Federal funding to close crossings, and (3) increasing funding for public education programs dedicated to reducing fatalities resulting from crossing collisions and trespassing.

The Action Plan's recommendations are designed to make government work better, provide flexibility to the States to address this problem, and improve public awareness of crossing safety through public/private partnerships. The following six goals are the guiding principles:

Enhance enforcement of traffic laws at crossings;

Enhance rail corridor crossing reviews and improvements;

Expand public education activities;

Increase safety at private crossings;

Improve data and research efforts; and

Prevent rail trespass tragedies.

8

9

The plan includes 55 recommendations and initiatives designed to address and implement these principles. We have already implemented several dealing with commercial vehicles, including sending notices to all 280,000 interstate motor carriers regarding grade crossing safety; also we will work with the States on sanctioning drivers who violate grade crossing

laws.

TRUCK SIZE AND WEIGHT

Now let me discuss turn to the issue of the size and weight of trucks. We have heard various proposals recently, some of which are incorporated in legislation before you which would freeze or roll back weight limits, length limits, State authority, or grandfather rights. The question of appropriate size and weight limits for trucks has always been a difficult one. It conjures up images of "grandfather rights" from the Interstate era, conflicting views of proper State-Federal relationships, rival economic interests, and uncertainty as to the operational safety of various types of trucks. The subject is at least as challenging as the task of approving the NHS. Extended fact-finding and debate are necessary to do justice to truck size and weight issues.

Federal vehicle weight limits (both gross vehicle weight and axle weights) currently apply only on Interstate highways. Considering its size, extending these limits to the entire NHS, as has been suggested by some, would represent a major extension of Federal activity into an area of traditional State authority. Truck size and weight issues are extremely complex; they relate not only to questions of highway safety and stewardship but to local, State, and national economic performance. The Department recognizes its overall responsibility for highway safety, as emphasized in Secretary Peña's Strategic Plan. At the same time, as transportation is becoming a larger part of the goods production, as well as

10

distribution systems, the effects of additional regulation on productivity take on renewed significance.

It is our view that any decision to establish national weight standards for the entire NHS should only be taken after thorough study and analysis of all the benefits and costs of such an action to all highway users as well as to the economy.

H.R. 4496, which you are considering today, would freeze the weight limits in effect on non-Interstate NHS highways at the start of this year (including weights authorized only by permit). It would also limit semitrailer lengths to 53 feet. Further, the bill would repeal the provision allowing States to determine their own-grandfather rights (the so-called 1982 Symms amendment). Instead, the Department of Transportation would be required to codify and freeze all such rights claimed by the States or recognized by the Department before the start of this year. Finally, the bill would require rulemaking to define the term "nondivisible load." This and other similar bills have the laudatory goal of increasing highway safety and addressing highway maintenance concerns by limiting the operations of larger trucks. We support these goals but believe that solutions may be more complex.

The Surface Transportation Assistance Act (STAA) of 1982 grandfathered all trailer lengths longer than 48 feet in lawful operation in that year, i.e., both the current and prospective fleet. The FHWA later determined, through rulemaking, that 10 States allowed trailers more than 53 feet long. H.R. 4496 would repeal that provision, while allowing only those trailers more than 53 feet long that are now in operation, or built in the year following passage of the bill, to remain in use.

The largest widely available trailers have grown from 45 feet to 53 feet in length since the early 1980s (and width has increased from 96 inches to 102 inches). This increase has produced significant operational efficiencies for motor carriers and shippers. Longer

11

trailers are used when the commodities they are carrying "cube out" before they "weigh out." That is, relatively low-density cargos can fill a vehicle to capacity before it reaches the 80,000 pound Interstate weight limit.

The current statutory scheme for truck size and weight limits is far from perfect. Vehicle size and weight issues are so difficult and contentious that many Administrations have abandoned the field entirely. The result has been a fragmented and increasingly incoherent set of laws determined by the needs of the moment and the path of least resistance. I was recently astonished to discover that the Federal Highway Administration has not made a concerted and comprehensive effort to analyze size and weight issues in the last 30 years not since the Bureau of Public Roads, which was then part of the Department of Commerce, submitted House Document No. 354 to the House Committee on Public Works in August of 1964, when Lyndon Johnson was President.

-

I believe that a national, and indeed a global, vision is needed to guide us into the 21st century. All of our recent initiatives have this goal in mind; that is how we approached NAFTA; it is how we are approaching the NHS. I believe a fundamental reexamination of all vehicle size and weight issues is necessary. We as a Nation simply cannot afford to continue muddling along with no vision for the future. We are concerned about the safety of our highway systems. We are concerned with the integrity of the physical infrastructure. We will prioritize this vision and we will begin the thorough reexamination I mentioned above; first internally and then through a dialogue with all affected parties, much in the manner of our ongoing zero-base review of motor carrier regulations.

Again, thank you for the opportunity to be with you this morning. I am glad to be able to discuss with you issues so important to the prosperity and well-being of our country. I will be pleased to respond to any questions you may have.