II 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1059 

To permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 pounds to use 

certain highways of the Interstate System in the State of Idaho which 

would provide significant savings in the transportation of goods throughout the United States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 18, 2009 

Mr. CRAPO introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To permit commercial vehicles at weights up to 129,000 

pounds to use certain highways of the Interstate System 

in the State of Idaho which would provide significant 

savings in the transportation of goods throughout the 

United States, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Idaho Efficient Vehicle 

5 Demonstration Act of 2009’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS. 

7 Congress finds that— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
2 

•S 1059 IS

1 (1) States including Montana, Nevada, Utah, 

2 and Wyoming have been grandfathered the right to 

3 operate up to 129,000-pound or greater vehicle com4 binations on 9 axles or more on Federal highways; 

5 (2) laws governing Federal highway funding ef6 fectively impose a limit of 105,500 pounds on the 

7 weight of vehicles permitted to use the Interstate 

8 System within the State of Idaho; 

9 (3) the State of Idaho is surrounded by the 

10 States specified in paragraph (1) that allow higher 

11 weight limits on the Interstate System, which puts 

12 the State of Idaho at a disadvantage in moving 

13 freight within Idaho and into those surrounding 

14 States; 

15 (4) in 2003, the legislature of the State of 

16 Idaho adopted House Bill 395, which established a 

17 10-year pilot project that allows vehicle combinations 

18 up to 129,000 pounds to be operated on 10 axles on 

19 specific routes in that State, but does not address 

20 the Interstate System; 

21 (5) in enacting the pilot project program in 

22 House Bill 395 of the State, the legislature required 

23 the Idaho Transportation Department to report to 

24 the legislature on the effect of the program; 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
3 

•S 1059 IS

1 (6) the Idaho Transportation Department is re2 quired to submit reports every 3 years during the 

3 10-year life of the pilot project program that de4 scribe the results of monitoring and evaluation of all 

5 important impacts, including impacts to safety, 

6 bridges, and pavement, on all pilot project routes; 

7 (7) the pilot project program terminates on 

8 July 1, 2013, unless the program is otherwise ex9 tended or sooner repealed by the legislature; 

10 (8) the administration of the pilot project, cou11 pled with the fact that vehicle combinations cannot 

12 operate at 129,000 pounds on the Interstate System, 

13 has forced those heavier vehicle combinations to di14 vert onto small State and local roads on which high15 er vehicle weight limits are allowed under State law; 

16 (9) the diversion of those vehicles onto those 

17 roads increases fuel costs because of increased idling 

18 time and total travel time along those roads; 

19 (10) the cost of transportation fuel has in20 creased more than 80 percent between calendar 

21 years 2007 and 2008; and 

22 (11) permitting commercial vehicles to travel on 

23 a select few Interstate System highways within the 

24 State at increased weight limits would provide— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
4 

•S 1059 IS

1 (A) significant savings in the transpor2 tation of goods throughout the State; and 

3 (B) substantial data and an opportunity 

4 for analysis of the impacts of the vehicles on 

5 bridges, highway safety, and pavements. 

6 SEC. 3. DEFINITIONS. 

7 In this Act: 

8 (1) COVERED INTERSTATE SYSTEM HIGH9 WAY.—The term ‘‘covered Interstate System high10 way’’ means any portion of a highway designated as 

11 a route on the Interstate System that, as of the date 

12 of enactment of this Act, is not exempt from the re13 quirements of subsection (a) of section 127 of title 

14 23, United States Code, pursuant to a waiver under 

15 that subsection. 

16 (2) DIRECTOR.—The term ‘‘Director’’ means 

17 the Director of the Idaho Transportation Depart18 ment. 

19 (3) INTERSTATE SYSTEM.—The term ‘‘Inter20 state System’’ has the meaning given the term in 

21 section 101(a) of title 23, United States Code. 

22 (4) PILOT PROJECT.—The term ‘‘pilot project’’ 

23 means the 10-year pilot project of the State, estab24 lished in 2003 under House Bill 395 of the State, 

25 that permits vehicle combinations weighing up to 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
5 

•S 1059 IS

1 129,000 pounds to be operated on specific routes in 

2 that State. 

3 (5) SECRETARY.—The term ‘‘Secretary’’ means 

4 the Secretary of Transportation. 

5 (6) STATE.—The term ‘‘State’’ means the State 

6 of Idaho. 

7 SEC. 4. WAIVER OF HIGHWAY FUNDING REDUCTION RELAT8 ING TO WEIGHT OF VEHICLES USING INTER9 STATE SYSTEM HIGHWAYS. 

10 (a) PROHIBITION RELATING TO CERTAIN VEHI11 CLES.—Notwithstanding section 127(a) of title 23, United 

12 States Code, the total amount of funds apportioned to the 

13 State under section 104(b)(1) of that title for any period 

14 may not be reduced under section 127(a) of that title if 

15 the State permits a vehicle combination described in sub16 section (b) to use a covered Interstate System highway 

17 in the State in accordance with this Act. 

18 (b) COMBINATION VEHICLES IN EXCESS OF 105,500 

19 POUNDS UP TO 129,000 POUNDS.—A vehicle described in 

20 this subsection is a vehicle that— 

21 (1) has a weight in excess of 105,500 pounds 

22 but not more than 129,000 pounds; 

23 (2) consists of a power unit hauling 2 or more 

24 trailers or semitrailers; 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
6 

•S 1059 IS

1 (3) does not exceed any vehicle weight limita2 tion that is applicable under State law to the oper3 ation of the vehicle on highways in the State that 

4 are not part of the Interstate System, as those laws 

5 are in effect on the date of enactment of this Act; 

6 and 

7 (4) is limited to travel only on— 

8 (A) the portion of Interstate Route 15 ex9 tending from the Montana border to the Utah 

10 border; 

11 (B) the portion of Interstate Route 86 ex12 tending from the junction of Interstate Route 

13 15 to the junction with Interstate Route 84; 

14 and 

15 (C) the portion of Interstate Route 84 ex16 tending from the Utah border to the Oregon 

17 border. 

18 (c) TERMINATION OF AUTHORITY.— 

19 (1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

20 this section and the authority provided under this 

21 section shall terminate on July 1, 2013. 

22 (2) EXCEPTIONS.—This section and the author23 ity provided under this section shall terminate on— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
7 

•S 1059 IS

1 (A) a date that is later than the date spec2 ified in paragraph (1), if the project is extended 

3 to that later date by the State; or 

4 (B) any date that is before, on, or after 

5 the date specified in paragraph (1), if the Sec6 retary— 

7 (i) determines that— 

8 (I) operation of vehicles described 

9 in subsection (b) on covered Interstate 

10 System highways has adversely af11 fected safety on the overall highway 

12 system; or 

13 (II) the Director has failed to 

14 collect the data described in section 

15 5(2); and 

16 (ii) publishes the determination, to17 gether with the date of termination of this 

18 section, in the Federal Register. 

19 (d) CONSULTATION REGARDING TERMINATION FOR

20 SAFETY.—In making a determination under subsection 

21 (c)(2)(A)(i), the Secretary shall consult with the Director. 

22 SEC. 5. RESPONSIBILITIES OF STATE. 

23 For the purpose of section 4, the State shall be con24 sidered to meet the conditions under this section if the 

25 Director— 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS
8 

•S 1059 IS

1 (1) submits to the Secretary a plan for use in 

2 meeting the conditions described in paragraph (2); 

3 and 

4 (2) collects data on the net effects that the op5 eration of vehicles described in section 4(b) on cov6 ered Interstate System highways in the State has on 

7 the safety of the overall highway system, as required 

8 by House Bill 395 of the State. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on PRODPC68 with BILLS