CMV Safety | Freight Logistics & Policy | Truck Size & Weight | TACT | Wireless, Vehicle-to-Infrastructure Communication

<< Back to News

FMCSA Internal Document Reveals Agencies Hidden Agenda on Large Truck Size and Weight

Paraphrased from The Truck Safety Coalition Website: http://www.trucksafety.org/fmcsa_documents.php

During the administration of then-Acting Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration (FMCSA) Administrator Annette Sandberg, truck safety advocates found out about a high level meeting called by the Assistant Secretary of Policy of the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT). The purpose of the meeting, involving the Federal Motor Carriers Safety Administration (FMCSA) and other agencies, was to discuss the USDOT supporting an increase in truck size and weight and a repeal of the 1992 freeze on longer combination vehicles (LCVs).

Joan Claybrook, the Chair of CRASH (Coalition for Responsible and Safe Highways) at the time and others met with then-Acting FMCSA Administrator Annette Sandberg to communicate the safety community's outrage and opposition to the anti truck safety views expressed in the briefing paper.

(We (ITRE) have made this dialog available here not as a means to associate the points in the briefing paper with the current FMCSA administration, but rather as 'representative,' more or less, of the substance of the ongoing debate between state and federal governments and the trucking industry over the expressed need for larger commercial vehicles and increased weight limits. ITRE has witnessed this firsthand in the North Carolina Legislature's passage of Senate Bill 1695 which, in its original version, would have unilaterally done away with existing STAA Truck Network restrictions on 53 ft trailer access to all roads under the Federal Aid Primary designation. It was only through the timely intervention of the Truck Safety Coalition and its CRASH members that the language in the final bill permitted the NCDOT to be the one to determine when/where such increased access should be granted. It is clear, at least in North Carolina, that 'the pressure in on' and will continue unabated until those responsible in the state for meeting the infrastructure needs of commerce can satisfy current logistical system needs for larger and heavier vehicles or can come up with acceptable alternative logistical system models and concepts for the safe and efficient surface movement of goods.)

To read the briefing paper and the rebuttal from truck safety advocates see the link above and download documents at the bottom of the page.