National Academies Press: OpenBook

Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation (2016)

Chapter: Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences

« Previous: Acronyms and Abbreviations
Page 98
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 98
Page 99
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 99
Page 100
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 100
Page 101
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 101
Page 102
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 102
Page 103
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 103
Page 104
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 104
Page 105
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 105
Page 106
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 106
Page 107
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 107
Page 108
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 108
Page 109
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 109
Page 110
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 110
Page 111
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 111
Page 112
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 112
Page 113
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 113
Page 114
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 114
Page 115
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 115
Page 116
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 116
Page 117
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 117
Page 118
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 118
Page 119
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 119
Page 120
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 120
Page 121
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 121
Page 122
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 122
Page 123
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 123
Page 124
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 124
Page 125
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 125
Page 126
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 126
Page 127
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 127
Page 128
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 128
Page 129
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 129
Page 130
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 130
Page 131
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 131
Page 132
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 132
Page 133
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 133
Page 134
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 134
Page 135
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 135
Page 136
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 136
Page 137
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 137
Page 138
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 138
Page 139
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 139
Page 140
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 140
Page 141
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 141
Page 142
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 142
Page 143
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 143
Page 144
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 144
Page 145
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 145
Page 146
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 146
Page 147
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 147
Page 148
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 148
Page 149
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 149
Page 150
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 150
Page 151
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 151
Page 152
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 152
Page 153
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 153
Page 154
Suggested Citation:"Appendix A - Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2016. Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/23607.
×
Page 154

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

98 A P P E N D I X A Maximum Permitted Axle Weights The maximum permitted axle weight specified by states along an OSOW route affects the configuration of overweight loads and the multi-state movement of those loads. When planning multi-state shipments, carriers must identify the state with the lowest maximum axle weight along their route to select and configure a trailer that is compliant in each state along the route. Carriers add axles in order to meet state maximum weight thresholds, but more axles mean heavier total weights, lower gas mileage, higher fees for equipment use, and ultimately a more expensive move for shippers. Variance in weights can affect the routing of a load. Depending on the available equipment, load origin and destination, and state axle weights, shippers may choose to route around states with lower weights. Routing around states with lower maximum permitted axle weights is more of an issue for superloads that may be unable to meet the axle weight limitations. Additionally, adding axles increases the weight and length of a load, which can change the way a load is clas- sified (OSOW load or superload). The load may cross the threshold for the hours of travel allowed or require additional escorts and additional permitting in the states along the route. The configuration of load and the route choices carriers make directly impact the restrictions an OSOW load encounters. State-to-state differences in the maximum permitted axle weights on tandem axles (two axles in a group shown in Figure A-1) and tridem axles (three axles in a group shown in Figure A-2) present larger challenges for OSOW carriers than the weights on a single axle. Tandem axles and tridem axles vary most widely in the lowest and highest weights allowed. The difference between the lightest and the heaviest allowances is amplified as the number of axles affected by the maxi- mum weight restriction increases. For each axle configuration, a number of states have a case-by-case calculation for the maxi- mum axle weight, which varies by spacing, route, tire width, and the legal bridge limit. When possible, the permit maximums for routes within states that covered the majority of interstates and the majority of roadways have been shown. Single Axle Across the country, the most prevalent maximum single axle weight is 20,000 lbs. This maximum is consistent across a swath of the Mississippi Valley states, allowing for movement from Minnesota to Mississippi. Maximums across the United States range from 20,000 lbs to 29,000 lbs, and more than a dozen states set the maximum single axle weight on a case-by-case basis (Figure A-3). Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 99 Tandem Axle The state-by-state variation in maximum allowable weights for tandem axles is larger than single axles with very few clusters of states with contiguous values. Similar to single axles, a number of states have a case-by-case calculation for the maximum weight on a tandem axle (Figure A-4). Tridem Axle The maximum weight for tridem axles shows less variation across states than maximum weights for single or tandem axles. The map shows that more than 20 states have maximum tridem axles between 60,000 and 63,000 lbs, and within this group many states maintain a 60,000 lb limit (Figure A-5). Quad Axle The maximum quad axle weight varies widely across the country with only a few clusters of states with similar maximums. The most frequently observed value for quad axle configurations is by a case-by-case calculation (Figure A-6). Figure A-1. Excavator on a removable gooseneck tandem axle trailer. Source: TheTruckersReport.com Source: Perkins Motor Transit Figure A-2. OSOW load traveling on a tridem trailer.

100 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-3. Permit maximum on single axle.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 101 Figure A-4. Permit maximum on tandem axles.

102 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-5. Permit maximum on tridem axles.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 103 Figure A-6. Permit maximum on quad axles.

104 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-7. Civilian escorts. Source: Perkins Motor Transport General Civilian Escort Requirements The number one role of an escort is safety. Escorts notify other roadway users that an OSOW load is ahead. Escorts may be required to lead and/or follow an OSOW load, depending on which of the dimensions are over the legal limit and the overall size of the load. For example, the first escort for an overheight load drives in the front of the load, and once the overheight load passes a second threshold an additional escort may be required, depending on the state. Other dimen- sions such as width and length may require three or more escorts, depending on the state or the route. Each additional escort drives in a specific position in relation to the load, in front of or behind the load, and each position serves a different purpose. The following explanation of civilian escort requirements is generalized for all escorts and applies to this section, as well as the next two sections (Figure A-7). Every state requires an escort once an OSOW configuration exceeds the length, width, or height limits. Furthermore, some states require escorts for loads that are above a certain weight or overhang threshold. States require OSOW escorts for certain loads because the performance characteristics and dimensions of those loads are significantly different than those of normal roadway users. For example, an overheight or overlength load may need to reduce its speed to one much lower than other traffic to navigate around a turn or under an overhead structure. The speed differences that occur when OSOW loads are operating necessitates added visibility in the form of lights, flags, and signs on both the load and the escorts. Also, overwidth loads may par- tially or substantially extend into the next lane, which calls for roadway users to exercise caution when passing or meeting an OSOW load on a roadway. Similarly, overweight loads and loads that hang over the front or end of the trailer may need escorts. States that require an escort for weight may be concerned about slow-moving vehicles due to performance or mandatory speed limits on bridge structures. Loads that have a front or rear overhang (rear more often requiring an escort) use escorts to warn other roadway users about the overhanging load and the possibil- ity of hitting the load before coming into contact with the trailer. Escorts are very important on roadways with changing gradients where a vehicle could blindly come upon an OSOW load going at a different speed or extending into the vehicle’s lane. States may require a civilian escort at different thresholds depending on the route or roadway type. Generally, states will vary the escort thresholds for length, width, and height, but have the same thresholds for weight and overhang regardless of route or roadway type. Therefore, the weight and overhang thresholds are shown in the general category and the thresholds for

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 105 two-lane and multilane roadways are shown in the following sections. Note that in some states lights can replace escorts under specific conditions. When given the option, the research team assumed the carrier would prefer to use lights rather than hire an escort. Weight As shown in Figure A-8, only nine states have requirements for a first civilian escort based on weight. Of the states with a weight threshold, most require escorts based on a set weight thresh- old. However, some states such as Montana and Wyoming require escorts when a load is limited in speed over bridges and other structures. In the case of Illinois, the findings of a bridge analysis determine whether an escort is required or not. Overhang When a load overhangs the trailer in the front or the rear, states may require a flag, flashing light, or a civilian escort. Figure A-9 displays the states that require a first civilian escort for rear Figure A-8. Weight threshold for first civilian escort.

106 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-9. Rear overhang threshold for first civilian escort. overhang. Rear overhang more frequently requires an escort than front overhang. Some states have overhang thresholds that are not specific in number and vary based on the load or roadway. For example, both Oregon and Minnesota may require an escort for a rear overhang, depending on the length of the overhang and the roadway on which it is operating. Additionally, Wash- ington requires an escort if the overhang is more than one-third of the trailer length. Overhang escort thresholds vary widely from state to state, ranging from states requiring an escort when rear overhang is greater than 5 in. to those requiring an escort when rear overhang is greater than or equal to 25 in. Western states generally have much higher thresholds than Eastern states. The majority of the Midwestern states and the Plains states do not require escorts for overhang. Two-Lane Civilian Escort Requirements As previously noted, civilian escort requirements vary significantly among states and may vary depending on the roadway or route network within a state. Most states differentiate escort requirements based on roadway type, typically for two categories: two-lane and multilane

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 107 highways. Other states implement roadway-specific escort requirements based on whether the roadway is divided, is an interstate, or belongs to a defined roadway network. For example, Cali- fornia differentiates among five route classes, each with its own requirement for civilian escorts. This section introduces escort requirements for two-lane roadways and undivided highways. When a state has multiple route classes such as California, the maps are developed assuming a single route class. Length First Civilian Escort As displayed in Figure A-10, the first civilian escort required for length shows very little regional consistency outside of the Northeastern states from New York to Maine. Beyond the Northeast, only a few contiguous states share the same length regulation. With a few exceptions, states west of the Mississippi have higher thresholds for the first escort than those east of the Mississippi. Figure A-10. Length threshold for first civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

108 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Second Civilian Escort Figure A-11 displays the length thresholds for a second civilian escort on two-lane roadways. Compared to the first civilian escort, fewer states require a second civilian escort, with a couple of states reserving the right to add an escort based on the load or the route. The Southeast has the highest concentration of states requiring a second escort. Illinois requires a second escort if the load is more than 145 ft long or if it is 110 ft long and more than 14 ft 6 in. wide or 14 ft 6 in. high. Width First Civilian Escort Figure A-12 displays the width thresholds where states require the first civilian escort. Compared with the length regulations, the width threshold displays large contiguous groupings of states with similar regulations. For example, there are blocks of Southeastern and Northeastern states with similar regulations. Thresholds of interior states are higher than those in the coastal regions. Figure A-11. Length threshold for second civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 109 Second Civilian Escort There are fewer states with width thresholds for a second civilian escort on two-lane roadways (Figure A-13). A number of states do not require a second civilian escort or require the second civilian escort on a case-by-case basis. Height First Civilian Escort Figure A-14 displays the height threshold for the first civilian escort on a two-lane roadway. States exhibit significant variation in height thresholds for escorts. Some states such as Minne- sota do not require a civilian escort but instead rely on route surveys to ensure safe operations. In the case of Montana and Kansas, the need for an escort is a function of route and load size. Montana requires an escort if the load requires utilities to cut power to electric lines. Figure A-12. Width threshold for first civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

110 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation There are only a few clusters of states with similar regulations. A cluster from Iowa to Pennsylvania has relatively conservative height thresholds compared to the other Midwestern and neighboring states. The states on the East Coast have the highest concentration of con- servative height thresholds, which is likely due to concerns about the heights of the existing infrastructure. Second Civilian Escort Nine states have specified height thresholds that require a second civilian escort. An additional four consider the second escort on a case-by-case basis. In the Central states, a chain of states from Texas to Wisconsin have case-by-case thresholds or require the second civilian escort after a certain height. See Figure A-15. Height Pole Requirement Height poles are used to test clearances on the route. They are a relatively inexpensive yet effective means of protecting infrastructure and OSOW loads from damage if they are used Figure A-13. Width threshold for second civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 111 Figure A-14. Height threshold for first civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

112 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-15. Height threshold for second civilian escort on two-lane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 113 correctly. Height poles are typically placed 6 in. higher than the height of the load on the front of the first civilian escort. It is the responsibility of the front escort to notify the driver of the load if the height pole strikes an overhead structure. Upon notification, the driver would stop and the overhead structure would be assessed to ensure that the load can safely proceed under the structure. When a load is over the height threshold, carriers may be required or they may choose to survey overhead structures. Under those circumstances, some states will not require a height pole. As seen in Figure A-16, with the exception of Maine, every state requiring a height pole is contiguous. Additionally the Midwest, the Southeast, and the Northwest have high concentra- tions of states requiring height poles. Multilane Civilian Escort Requirements Thresholds for escorts on multilane divided highways are generally higher than those found on two-lane roadways because the loads are not moving against oncoming traffic. In the case of multilane civilian escorts, the values for interstates were reported when states had different requirements for interstates and non-interstates. Figure A-16. Height pole required on first civilian escort. OSOW State Regulation: Height Pole Required on First Civilian Escort Height Pole Required on First Civilian Escort

114 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Length First Civilian Escort The length threshold for the first civilian escort on multilane roadways is very similar to the length threshold on two-lane roadways (Figure A-17). With a few outliers, the most notable similarity is that the Mississippi River splits the country into less stringent regulations in the west and more stringent regulations in the east. The Northeast administers similar regulations. The states on the West Coast and the Plains states have similar thresholds with a couple of states outside the 115 ft to 125 ft threshold range. Second Civilian Escort Compared with the length threshold for the first civilian escort, fewer states require a second civilian escort for overlength vehicles (Figure A-18). Many of the Western, Plains, and some of the Midwestern states do not require a second civilian escort for length. With the exception of Florida, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Maine, the states on the East Coast typically require a second civilian escort for length. Figure A-17. Length threshold for first civilian escort on multilane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 115 Width First Civilian Escort The most noticeable pattern in the width threshold for the first civilian escort is that there are three major clusters of states: one extends from Idaho to Illinois, the other encompasses the states from Indiana to the East Coast, and the final includes the remainder of the states in the Southern Plains and the states in the Pacific Northwest (Figure A-19). While there are a couple of states within each block that have different regulations, the pattern is still highly grouped. Colorado is a notable deviation requiring an escort or a flashing rear light on multi- lane roadways. When a flashing light can replace an escort, the research team assumed the carrier would use the light rather than hire an escort. Second Civilian Escort Figure A-20 shows the width threshold for the second escort on multilane roadways. Com- pared with Figure A-19, the regional clusters have either decreased or disappeared. The Northern Figure A-18. Length threshold for second civilian escort on multilane roadways.

116 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Plains states and from Maryland to South Carolina remain as a cluster of states with similar regu- lations. Again, the Eastern states typically impose more restrictive regulations compared with the Midwestern and Western states. Compared with two-lane roadways, about twice as many states do not require a second civil- ian escort on multilane roadways for overwidth vehicles. It is not surprising that states have more relaxed regulations on multilane roadways compared with two-lane roadways, given their differences in design and safety barriers. Height First Civilian Escort With the exception of Kansas, the height threshold maps for two-lane roadways and multi- lane roadways are the same (Figure A-21). The safety issues for overheight vehicles on two-lane Figure A-19. Width threshold for first civilian escort on multilane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 117 Figure A-20. Width threshold for second civilian escort on multilane roadways.

118 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-21. Height threshold for first civilian escort on multilane roadways. roadways and multilane roadways are very similar, as is evident from the maps, which are also very similar. Second Civilian Escort The height threshold for the second civilian escort on a multilane roadway (Figure A-22) is very similar to the threshold on a two-lane roadway. The main differences are that Kansas has a value rather than being case-by-case, and Montana and Wyoming do not require a second escort. Overall, most states do not require a second escort and the Central states have the highest concentration of states requiring a second escort for height. Height Pole Requirement The requirement of a height pole on a multilane highway is very similar to the require- ment of a height pole on a two-lane highway (Figure A-23). Height poles continue the trend of the states east of the Mississippi, which have more stringent regulations than those west of the Mississippi.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 119 Figure A-22. Height threshold for second civilian escort on multilane roadways.

120 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation OSOW State Regulation: Height Pole Required on First Civilian Escort on Multilane Roadways Height Pole Required on First Civilian Escort on Multilane Roadways Figure A-23. Height pole required on first civilian escort on multilane roadways.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 121 State Police Requirements Police escorts are required when states believe that civilian escorts are insufficient to ensure that a load moves safely through the jurisdiction. If required, a police escort procurement is an expen- sive element of an OSOW move, driven in part by the variability in regulations governing police hours of duty and jurisdiction. Some states do not allow civilian escorts to control traffic, requiring the state police to shut down intersections as shown in Figure A-24. In cases where an OSOW load needs to control an intersection so that it can use both lanes of the roadway to make a turn, a police escort may be required to stop and direct traffic during the maneuver. The number of state police officers required for a particular move is frequently specified by the state permitting office, but can also be defined by the district offices. OSOW carriers often bid jobs as cost plus police cost because they are often unsure of how many police officers will be required when the states leave the choice up to the district offices or require police officers on a case-by-case basis. From a cost perspective, states often require a minimum number of hours the police must be paid per OSOW move. In some cases, even if police escorts are only needed for a small portion of a move, regulations require that the police accompany the load for the entirety of its trip within the jurisdiction. From an operational perspective, carriers have to work around the hours police will work, plan with district offices, and plan for exchanges of escorts at jurisdictional bound- aries. There are states where police are only available during the eight-hour standard business day, which includes traveling home from the load’s location. When limited to less than a full workday, travel can be slowed significantly. Some states require carriers to hire police from the district the load is traveling through, which requires coordinating and potentially waiting for escorts at district boundaries. Length First Police Escort From a national perspective, much of the United States does not require a police escort when an OSOW load is overlength (Figure A-25). The Northeastern states are generally the strictest in requiring a police escort after a load reaches a specific length threshold. Outside the Northeastern states, there are very few contiguous states that require a police escort for overlength OSOW loads. Second Police Escort Even fewer states require two police escorts for overlong OSOW loads (Figure A-26). Five states have specified thresholds and four states reported that a second police escort is required on a case-by-case basis. Overall, states do not typically require two police escorts if an OSOW load is above its length threshold only. Figure A-24. Police-controlled intersection. Source: Perkins Motor Transport

122 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-25. Length threshold for first police escort.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 123 Figure A-26. Length threshold for second police escort.

124 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Width First Police Escort Relative to overlength OSOW loads, overwidth loads are much more likely to require police escorts. A chain of states from the Midwest extending east and west require police escorts for overwidth OSOW loads. The Southeast states, like the Northeast, have stricter regulations than the rest of the country. Connecticut bases police escorts on multiple dimen- sions, requiring a police escort if a load is more than 13 ft 5 in. wide and more than 15 ft high (Figure A-27). Second Police Escort The number of states requiring a second police escort greatly decreases compared to the states requiring a first police escort. In fact, more than half the states with a requirement of one police escort did not require a second for loads with larger widths. The central and western parts of the Figure A-27. Width threshold for first police escort.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 125 country contain very few states with any requirement for a second escort. Overall, there are very few states with a second police escort requirement (Figure A-28). Height First Police Escort Less than half of the states have police escort requirements for the height of an OSOW load, with wide geographic variability (Figure A-29). Weight Weight for First Police Escort The majority of the states do not require a police escort for weight and those that do are geo- graphically diverse (Figure A-30). Figure A-28. Width threshold for second police escort.

126 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-29. Height threshold for first police escort.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 127 Figure A-30. Weight threshold for first police escort.

128 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Permit Processing Time Issuing OSOW permits is the primary role of state permitting offices. Each state has different forms, requirements, technology, and staffing for permitting OSOW loads, which means that the time needed to process permits can vary greatly by state. Additionally, states have different thresholds for loads requiring additional analysis, such as bridge or district reviews. Carriers maintain internal knowledge about the time needed to permit a load in each state and order permits that take the longest first to make sure that all permits are in hand when the load is scheduled to move. The trend in OSOW permitting is a move toward the automation of OSOW loads up to a spe- cific size envelope. A 2012 study found that at least 19 states have investigated and implemented technologies referred to generically as advanced permitting and routing systems.1 These systems can quickly find, approve, and return permits, taking into account infrastructure restrictions, construction, weather, and other limiting conditions. Each state automates the OSOW permit- ting process to varying degrees, so the impact of automation varies with state. Generally, auto- mated systems allow the permit office to quickly approve loads up to a specific size envelope, thereby leaving more time for large loads that require greater attention.2 Single-Trip Permits Most states with online permitting services can issue routine OSOW loads almost instanta- neously as long as the load is below a certain size and weight requirement. Some states require an individual to review each permit regardless of size, a process that typically requires up to a day for a permit to be issued. The speed with which an OSOW permit is issued is directly related to the thresholds for route surveys, district reviews, utility notification, and bridge reviews. Once a load exceeds the threshold and needs additional analyses, the time and cost of permitting the load also increase. Generally, the processing times for single-trip routine OSOW permits do not cause major delays. Even when a permit requires resubmittal, most states reported a turnaround time of less than one day. Figure A-31 displays the processing time for single-trip routine OSOW permits, based on data collected from state DOTs. The processing time for a single-trip OSOW permit is similar throughout a cluster of states that extends from Idaho to North Dakota in the north and Utah to Arkansas in the south. Adding to this cluster, Texas, Louisiana, Missouri, and Illinois have pro- cessing times that are quicker, making this grouping of states one of the fastest to process permits. The East Coast and the West Coast generally have longer processing times. Superloads The time it takes to process a superload permit is dependent on the infrastructure and the load’s size and weight. The infrastructure may require numerous bridge analyses, a route sur- vey, utility notifications, and district reviews. Superload permits on routes with relatively few bridges can generally be processed within 2 days. At the other end of the spectrum, some states 1 Middleton, D., Y. Li, J. Le, and N. Koncz. Accommodating Oversize and Overweight Loads: Technical Report. Texas Transpor- tation Institute, 2012. 2 C. Titze. Oversize/Overweight Permitting Practices Review. New Jersey Department of Transportation, 2011. http://www.nj.gov/ transportation/refdata/research/reports/NJ-2011-002.pdf. Accessed November 16, 2015.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 129 can take 6 to 8 weeks for superload approvals. Superloads with complicated routing challenges may take several weeks to receive permits because state DOTs can only permit roadways that are state-maintained. States with numerous infrastructure impediments such as low or weak bridges rely on city and county roadways for routing around impediments. In some instances, carriers are required to have approval from cities and counties to use their roadways before the state will issue the state permit. Therefore, states with many OSOW impediments that rely on local roadways will typically have longer permit processing times. Compared to the processing time for single-trip, routine OSOW permits, superloads are more varied. States have different thresholds for characterizing a load as a superload, which contributes to the variation in processing times. Geography and infrastructure, especially bridges, also add to the variability in processing times for superloads. States reported values anywhere from 1 day to up to 8 weeks for processing superloads. Figure A-32 displays the variation in the permit processing time for superloads. While there are a few regional clus- ters, superload carriers can expect variation in superload processing times when permitting a multi-jurisdictional OSOW load. OSOW State Regulation: Processing Time for Single-Trip OSOW Permits Processing Time for Single-Trip OSOW Permits Figure A-31. Processing time for single-trip OSOW permits.

130 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Hours of Travel The hours of travel an OSOW load can move are regulated in every state. Typically, states will allow loads within a specified size envelope to move 24 hours per day through their state. When loads exceed the specified size envelope, they are restricted in their hours of travel. The most common hours of travel for OSOW loads are sunrise to sunset. But states define sunrise and sunset differently. Some states allow loads to move one-half hour before sunrise and one-half hour after sunset, and others are limited to the exact time of sunrise until sunset. Beyond the daylight restrictions, states and municipalities limit travel during rush hour near cities, during school bus travel hours, on holidays, or during special events in local jurisdictions. States also may allow their districts and localities to specify when travel is allowed on their per- mits, creating an additional layer of restriction. Hours of travel restrictions are used to limit the travel of OSOW loads to a time when it is determined safe to move. Generally, states have similar regulations governing movement on weekdays, in that they allow envelope vehicles to move 24 hours per day within daytime travel limits (e.g., sunrise to sunset). Weekend travel comes with much more variation. Some states do not allow weekend travel while Figure A-32. Processing time for superload permits.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 131 others restrict weekend travel to Sunday only. Overall, carriers are much more likely to face travel restrictions on the weekend than during the week. Monday Through Friday Hours of Travel Length for Continuous Travel Less than half of the states allow 24 hours of travel per day Monday through Friday for OSOW loads that are overlength. Figure A-33 displays length thresholds for 24 hours of travel per day. Loads moving in states in the non-applicable category mean all overlength loads are subject to hours of travel restrictions. Western states are more likely to allow 24 hours per day travel for overlength loads along with a grouping of Central states. Width for Continuous Travel States do not allow 24 hours of travel per day for loads with overwidth dimensions as often as they do allow loads with overlength dimensions. Most of the states in the Upper Midwest and the West allow 24 hours of travel per day for overwidth vehicles up to a certain threshold only. Figure A-33. Threshold for length where loads can move 24 hours per day Monday through Friday. OSOW State Regulation: Threshold for Length where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Threshold for Length where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday

132 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Additionally, there are two major clusters of states with similar regulations: one from California to Washington and the other from Idaho through the Dakotas. But the states in the lower Mid- west, Northeast, and Southeast do not allow 24 hours per day travel for loads that are overwidth (Figure A-34). Height for Continuous Travel Compared to width, fewer states allow OSOW loads to move 24 hours per day if they are over- height (Figure A-35). Again, the West Coast has the highest concentration of states that allow 24 hours of travel per day for overheight loads, but the most frequent policy is to prohibit 24 hours of travel per day for overheight loads. Weight for Continuous Travel Figure A-36 displays weight thresholds for 24 hours of travel per day. The majority of Midwestern, South-Central, Northeastern, and East Coast states allow 24 hours of travel per OSOW State Regulation: Threshold for Width where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Threshold for Width where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Figure A-34. Threshold for width where loads can move 24 hours per day Monday through Friday.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 133 Figure A-35. Threshold for height where loads can move 24 hours per day Monday through Friday. OSOW State Regulation: Threshold for Height where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Threshold for Height where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday

134 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation day for overweight vehicles. Overall, the majority of states that allow 24 hours of travel per day for overweight vehicles require the load to be overweight only. Conversely, other states allow length, width, and height dimensions to be over the legal size in addition to the load being overweight as long as none of the dimensions are above the 24 hours of travel per day envelope. Weekend Hours of Travel States implement weekend hours of travel restrictions in a variety of ways. Some states bar all OSOW travel on Saturdays and Sundays, others restrict Sunday travel only, and still others restrict OSOW movement for loads up to specified weights and dimensions. Weekend hours of travel are important to OSOW carriers because of their impact on route planning and the potential delay they may cause. To the extent possible, carriers plan their routes such that they get through states with weekend travel restrictions by Friday or begin travel in those states on OSOW State Regulation: Threshold for Weight where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Threshold for Weight where Loads Can Move 24 Hours Per Day Monday through Friday Figure A-36. Threshold for weight where loads can move 24 hours per day Monday through Friday.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 135 OSOW State Regulation: Saturday Travel Is Allowed Saturday Travel Is Allowed Figure A-37. Saturday travel is allowed. Monday. The research team simplified the OSOW restrictions on weekend travel to display states that bar all OSOW travel. Saturday Travel Allowed All but a few states allow Saturday travel for loads within a specified dimension and weight envelope. Figure A-37 displays the states that restrict all OSOW loads from traveling on Saturdays. Generally, states allow Saturday travel with the exception of New Hampshire and Rhode Island. Additionally, Maine restricts Saturday travel during the months of July and August. Sunday Travel Allowed OSOW travel is restricted on Sunday in more states than it is on Saturday. In total, 10 states have either a seasonal or an annual restriction on OSOW travel on Sundays. Among the states

136 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation that restrict OSOW on Sunday, Maine enforces seasonal restrictions on Sunday travel during July and August (Figure A-38). Civilian Escort Certification While all states require civilian escorts once a load exceeds state-defined dimensions, some states require escorts to become certified through a training course to promote safe operations. The number of states requiring certification is trending upward and should continue to increase given recent NTSB recommendations that AASHTO and the commercial vehicle safety alliance work together to institute a model training and certification process for escorts.3 While states with escort certification requirements typically recognize escort certification from other states, New York does not recognize any other state’s civilian escort certification program. OSOW State Regulation: Sunday Travel Is Allowed Sunday Travel Is Allowed Figure A-38. Sunday travel is allowed. 3 Collapse of Interstate 5 Skagit River Bridge Following a Strike by an Oversize Combination Vehicle, Mount Vernon, Washington, May 23, 2013. NTSB, 2014. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/accidentreports/reports/HAR1410.pdf.

Additional Escort Requirements Like other aspects of OSOW transportation, states regulate escort operations differently. For example, there are requirements on the type of escort car, following distance, and the duties an escort is allowed to perform (e.g., traffic management). Beyond certification, some states have requirements on what escorts must carry as well as the size and weight of the escort vehicles. One carrier noted that its company uses vans as its escort vehicles in order to carry the neces- sary equipment to support OSOW operations, but vans are not allowed to be escort vehicles in Louisiana. When escorting a load originating or destined for Louisiana, carriers have to hire a local escort company to follow the load, essentially doubling the cost of moving through the state. Importance of Civilian Escorts in OSOW Operation Civilian escorts play an integral role in safely moving OSOW loads. Evidence of the importance of civilian escorts can be found in the conclusions of the NTSB study of the Washington State I-5 bridge collapse. On May 23, 2013, an OSOW load hit the I-5 bridge above the Skagit River. The bridge collapsed shortly after it was struck, injuring three motorists in the process. The OSOW load was led by an escort vehicle equipped with a height pole to identify overhead structures that the load could potentially hit. The escort vehicle driver reported not hitting the bridge with the height pole, but another motorist reported seeing the pole hit four or five bridge elements. The approximate locations of the truck and escort vehicle are shown below. Source: Collapse of Interstate 5 Skagit River Bridge Following a Strike by an Oversize Combination Vehicle, Mount Vernon, Washington, May 23, 2013 Approximate position of OSOW truck and escort vehicle. The NTSB report from the Skagit bridge accident sheds light on the permitting and operational oversight needed for safe OSOW travel. NTSB outlines numerous actions that the carrier, the state, and the escort com- pany could have taken to avoid the I-5 accident. One conclusion was, “The lack of standardization of training for pilot/escort vehicle drivers among the states and the failure of the majority of states to require certification or training of such drivers leaves some pilot/escort vehicle drivers poorly prepared to carry out their duties.” Addi- tionally, NTSB stated, “Carriers should not have to change escorts at state lines. Standardization of training for pilot/escort vehicle drivers would facilitate reciprocity among the states.”4 NTSB is heavily in favor of an escort certification program and argues for standardization of training and implementation of escort certification. 4 Collapse of Interstate 5 Skagit River Bridge Following a Strike by an Oversize Combination Vehicle, Mount Vernon, Washington, May 23, 2013.

138 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Civilian escort certification is another issue for OSOW carriers to consider when planning a move. Some carriers maintain their own escort fleet, whereas others hire escorts from private companies when they are needed. As carriers expand their areas of operation into states that require escort certification, they will have to ensure that company escorts are certified within the state or they may have to hire escorts from the state. Carriers may choose not to certify company escorts in a state such as New York where they work infrequently or they may be certified in a state that has limited reciprocity. In such instances, carriers hire escorts to move them through a state while their own escorts follow the hired escorts. This means that the carrier is paying its personnel and also paying for fuel to follow the load because the escort is not certified in that state. Carriers who want their escorts to be certified in every state could get Utah’s certification, which is recognized in every state with the exception of New York, and New York’s certification. There is no guarantee that states with new escort certification programs will recognize Utah’s or New York’s program. Figure A-39 displays the states that have an escort certification program currently in place. This trend will continue to evolve as a number of states are in the process of implementing escort certification programs. Figure A-39. Civilian escort certification required.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 139 Route Surveys Route surveys are required after loads exceed specified dimensions. Most states require route surveys above a specific height threshold, while others have route survey thresholds for length, width, and height. In a route survey, a surveyor drives the route with a height pole set slightly higher than the load’s maximum height to identify conflicts with overhead structures. Surveyors are looking for bridges, walkways, highway signs, or low wires in the path of the load. Route surveyors also measure road widths on corners to determine if the load can pass through safely. They also check to ensure there are no construction zones along the route. Carriers complete route survey forms to prove that they conducted a survey and to verify that there were no issues along the route. The route survey forms contain the carrier’s name, the names of escort companies, the size and weight of the load, the origin and destination of the load, the date of the survey, and the route. Surveys act as the schematics for the operational planning of OSOW moves. As such, the surveys must be exact and thoroughly completed. A route survey can inform the choice of trailer if there are infrastructure constraints that prevent the use of a truck configuration. For example, an at-grade rail crossing could have a steep enough slope to cause a lowboy trailer to bottom out. Route Survey as a Safety Tool Route surveys act as an overall check on permitted routes assigned during the permitting process. A carrier described a load to be moved through three states that did not require a route survey, but the carrier conducted a survey to ensure the load could make it through the assigned route. During the survey, the surveyor identified two bridges that were too low for the load being transported. The carrier requested a different route around the bridges to clear the overhead obstacles. If the load had moved without the survey, the low bridges would have been identified by the lead escort through the height pole, but the load would have had to back down the two-lane roadway until it could safely park and wait for a new route. Route surveys are an example of alignment between the permitting office and OSOW carriers. In the example given, the route survey conducted by the carrier saved time and money as well as reduced the chance of an accident during the move. Areas where the incentives align for regulations suggest agreement on the need for the regulation, which leaves agreement on the threshold as the final piece for state DOT and industry buy-in. Figure A-40 shows a load maneuvering around a telephone pole using rear steering to make the corner. A route survey identified problem corners and ensured that the loaded truck would be able to complete the route. Faulty route surveys can result in delays or serious damage to infrastructure because overhead structures such as utility lines have not been moved. Figure A-41 displays the height threshold when state permitting offices require a route survey. Fourteen states allow carrier discretion to determine whether a route survey is needed. Other states determine route survey needs on a case-by-case basis or by using specific thresholds. In some cases it is required for all loads. Route survey requirements are widely variable with only a few clusters of states with similar values. The Northeast, with the exception of Maine and Rhode Island, is the largest cluster of states with similar regulations.

140 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Source: Perkins Motor Transport Figure A-40. OSOW load cornering a two-lane roadway. Figure A-41. Height where route survey is required.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 141 Utility Notification According to industry representatives, permitting and operational requirements that accom- pany utility notification are a time-intensive and expensive part of moving high loads. Utility notification encompasses power, phone, and cable infrastructure that would obstruct a load along its route. Carriers must contact all potentially affected utilities, including local cooperative utili- ties, city and regional power companies, telephone companies, and cable companies. The utility notification phase follows the route survey where overhead issues are identified by the surveyor. During the route survey, surveyors will note the name on utility poles to determine whose lines are obstructing the load. When the pole does not have a name on it, the carrier must indepen- dently identify the owner of the utility line. Identifying the owner of a low line is one of the biggest impediments to efficiently notifying and moving utilities. Some states have resources that lay out the utility service territory maps and provide contact information to facilitate the notification. The Impact of Utility Notification on OSOW Cost Utility notification is a high cost aspect of OSOW loads. The cost is heavily con- centrated on the operations side because of the cost of contracting utilities to raise wires. A load from Wisconsin to Alberta encountered 64 different utili- ties and resulted in a total additional cost of $230,000. Another load traveling within Wisconsin traveled less than 100 miles, but the utilities cost was more than $200,000. In some cases, the identification, notification, and/or the cost of lifting lines is equal to the total operational cost of moving the load. The cost of lifting utility lines is not the responsibility of permitting officials. Additionally, there is a clear need for carriers to safely pass overhead utilities. Some states and localities provide resources such as territory maps and utility contact information for utility notification to increase the efficiency of identify- ing and organizing the raising of overhead utilities. The overall goal of increas- ing the ease of compliance is to increase the number of compliant carriers. Once the utilities are identified and notified of the low line, carriers coordinate with the utili- ties companies to accompany the OSOW load and raise low-hanging utility lines (Figure A-42). Each company handles scheduling utility assistance differently, with some requiring a two- month notice. After utilities are scheduled, carriers relay changes in their progress to ensure that the utilities are ready. Many utility companies will not work on weekends, which delays the load if it is allowed to travel on weekends and encounters wires during weekend hours. Carriers and permitting agencies share the same goal of minimizing utility conflicts with OSOW moves. For permitting officials, the goal is to preserve the infrastructure and for carriers the goal is to protect the load and avoid the cost of utility repairs. Figure A-43 displays the height threshold when utility notification is required. States typically follow one of four approaches to the utility notification threshold: • Define specific height thresholds, • Require all OSOW loads to notify utilities, • Leave the decision to the carrier, or • Make a determination based on the load and route.

142 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-43. Height where utility notification is required. Source: Perkins Motor Transport Figure A-42. Bucket trucks lifting utility line.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 143 Western states have relatively relaxed standards for the height threshold compared to the Midwest, Southeast, and Northeast. Outside the Western states, the rest of the country displays more diversity for the height threshold for utility notification. Permit Extensions Permit extensions allow OSOW carriers to prolong the number of days a permit is valid. Some states issue an extension on a single-trip permit, but some require the carrier to refile the permit. A permit extension can be completed more quickly than refiling a permit. In the case of a refile, the permit is added to the queue of new permits, whereas an extension progresses quickly because it is not subject to the analysis required of a new permit. The number of days that a permit could be extended and the reasons for the extension vary across states. As identified by the research team through a survey of states: • States reported offering anywhere from a 1-day to a 15-day extension. • Many states reported that extensions were issued on a case-by-case basis, with weather and mechanical problems being the most-cited reason for granting an extension. • States differ in their definition of weather delay. Alabama noted that extensions were most likely under emergency issues, such as a hurricane or ice storm. • Some states such as Oklahoma require carriers to have a receipt for maintenance of the equip- ment in order to get an extension due to a breakdown (while other states do not have this requirement). • States that do not allow for extensions require the carrier to refile and pay for a new permit. Similarly, some states charge for the extension of the permit. While both refiles and extensions can cost money, refiles also need time to be issued. The Impact of Permit Extensions on OSOW Transportation Costs Carriers use permit extensions when they encounter a delay during hauling and require additional time. Extensions allow OSOW carriers to continue to move without stopping if they are allowed to extend a permit before it expires. Some states will not allow the carrier to extend a permit until the last day the permit is valid. If the last day falls on a weekend, the carrier may have to wait until Monday, causing further delay. Carriers must reapply for their permit in states that do not allow permit exten- sions. Carriers must pay for the permit to be refiled and may have to wait days for a new permit to be issued, especially if the permit enters the queue with all new permits. Some states will expedite “refiles” because they already have most of the approvals necessary to ensure safe travel. In cases where an exten- sion is filed on a weekend or if the refile goes to the bottom of the queue, carriers face anywhere from an $800 to $7,500 per day cost in wages and lost productivity depending on the nature of the load and the move. Variability in cost is particularly a function of the size of the crew and the equipment being used.

144 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-44 displays the states that allow and do not allow permit extensions. When a state responded that it allowed extensions on a case-by-case basis, the research team classified it as allowing extensions. Most states allow permit extensions of some kind. Western states issue permit extensions much more frequently than other regions. Most states allow for extensions in case of inclement weather or vehicle breakdowns. Permit Revision Though similar to permit extensions, permit revisions are needed for a larger variety of reasons including changes to route, equipment, moving date, dimensions, or weights. Similar to extensions, states allow revisions for varying reasons and charge varying costs to revise a permit. The need for revisions is largely due to the lead time required to plan and permit an OSOW move. As noted in the typology, OSOW carriers moving superloads and megaloads take vary- ing lengths of time to obtain permits. In the case of superloads, a permit can take months to get issued, during which the information about the equipment, dates, route, or load could change. OSOW loads require revisions for the same reasons, even though their planning times are much shorter, making revisions less of a concern. The information on a permit could change for a Figure A-44. Permit extensions allowed.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 145 variety of reasons, such as a piece of equipment being repaired, replacement of equipment, con- struction along the route, the shipper miscalculating the weight or size of the load, etc. In states that allow revisions, the carrier can generally make adjustments to the permit and remain on schedule. In states that do not allow revisions, the carrier must refile the permit and wait for that permit to be issued. Even in states that allow revisions, there are limitations on what can be revised. Generally, permit office errors and equipment changes such as truck and trailer information can be revised. Conversely, there are states that will not allow a revision if the revision changes the route or weight, or if the new dimensions require additional escorts. Some states require the permit revision to occur within a certain timeframe, ranging from 30 minutes to 72 hours from the time the permit was issued. Revisions contribute to the same delays and costs as extensions, but for a greater number of reasons. In addition to those cited, there is the potential for delay in travel when a carrier has to reorder a permit because the state does not allow revisions or the field that needs revising is not allowed. As noted for extensions, the potential for delays is larger for superloads than for regular loads because superloads take a much longer time to be processed. Additionally, superload per- mits cost more than regular load permits, ranging from $10 to several thousand dollars. Figure A-45 shows whether states allow permit revisions. Most states allow permit revisions after they have been filed. The West Coast and New England have the highest concentration of Figure A-45. Single-trip permit revision allowed. OSOW State Regulation: Single-Trip Permit Revision Allowed Single-Trip Permit Revision Allowed

146 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation states that do not allow permit modification, while the Southeast, Midwest, and Plains states have large contiguous clusters of states that allow modification. As previously discussed, permit revisions are allowed for a variety of reasons throughout the country. The states that reported revisions on a case-by-case basis were placed in the yes category. Number of Days a Single-Trip Permit Is Valid Each permit type, other than multi-trip permits, is valid for a set window of time, meaning that the load must move from origin to destination within that window or the carrier must obtain an extension of the current permit or refile for a new permit.5 The number of days a single-trip permit is valid ranges from 3 days in a number of states to 15 days in Indiana. Carriers must coordinate the windows that permits are valid for when making multi-state moves to ensure that the permit will not expire en route. Beyond coordinating the windows, carriers must ensure that they can transit a state within the permit window. While more of an issue for superloads, it may take a load the whole permit duration to travel through a state if weather, congestion, or operational restrictions slow the speed of travel. Additionally, if a permit expires on a weekend the carrier may have to wait until the permitting office opens on Monday to apply for a new permit or extension. Carriers will often order multiple permits for the same load to ensure they will have enough time to travel through a state. Figure A-46 displays the national patchwork of the duration of a single-trip permit. The num- ber of days a permit is valid varies throughout the United States, but the figure shows a concen- tration of states in the Northeast and along the East Coast having permit durations of at least 5 days. The Midwest and Western states display a variety of durations with only a couple of contiguous states sharing the same number of days a permit is valid. Minimum Clearance Minimum clearance is the distance between the top of the load and the bottom of the over- head structure. Permitting offices and carriers assess minimum clearance as part of route sur- veys, which look at restrictions along the route. The purpose of a route survey is to ensure that no overlays, pavement heaves, or any other issue will affect the clearance. Once the survey has been completed, carriers must ensure a gap equal to or greater than the mini- mum clearance between the measured height of the overhead structure and the height of the load. Minimum clearance acts as a buffer for dips in the roadway and bouncing or shifting loads that make a load taller than initially measured. For example, a load might shift in transit, mak- ing one side sit higher than the other. More importantly, the load’s highest point may have increased, which could come close to hitting an overhead structure. The majority of states require 3 in. clearance with some requiring as little as 1 in. or as much as 6 in. Minimum clearance is calculated differently depending on the state. Some states base the minimum clearance on the lane with the lowest height to take into account slanted roadways or overhead structures. Others will allow the carrier to calculate the clearance based on the lane with the greatest gap between the pavement surface and the overhead structure, the idea being that the load must travel in the lane with the greatest gap when it goes under the overhead struc- ture. Minimum clearance affects loads differently depending on their configuration. Cylindrical 5 Each single-trip permit contains an origin and a destination.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 147 loads have a single point where clearance is an issue, whereas rectangular loads have to worry about corner clearances due to the angle of the road or overheard structures. Minimum clearance restrictions can be avoided by taking off ramps to detour over the struc- ture rather than under it. In some cases, there are no on and off ramps allowing such detours over the structure and the load is routed around the structure. When an alternate route is not feasible, carriers and permitting agencies use ad hoc approaches, such as lowering speed, using a lane with greater clearance, or using hydraulic trailers to lower a load. Minimum clearance is a good example of state permitting offices and carriers having aligned safety and infrastructure preservation goals. The goal for the permitting office is to move the load safely and to avoid infrastructure damage. Safety is also the desired outcome for shippers and carriers, along with avoiding damage to the load and potentially paying for infrastructure reconstruction. In some cases, carriers have noted that they will use a front escort even when they are not required to ensure that they will not hit overhead structures. Figure A-47 displays the various values required by state permitting offices for minimum clear- ance. Some states allow the state DOT the discretion to choose the minimum clearance required OSOW State Regulation: Duration of a Single-Trip Permit Duration of a Single-Trip Permit Figure A-46. Duration of a single-trip permit.

148 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Impact of Minimum Clearance on OSOW Permitting When minimum clearance requirements are not met and no alternate route is available, carriers and permit- ting offices work closely to find a safe solution. One example occurred on a roadway that pitched the width of the two lanes, giving one lane greater distance between the roadway and the overhead structure. The mini- mum clearance for the overhead structure was based on the lane with the smallest clearance to ensure that a load was safe to travel under the structure regardless of the lane. Yet the OSOW carrier received special per- mission to use the lane with more clearance, but with the requirement to hire two police escorts to ensure that the load could get into the correct lane before passing under the structure, costing between $500 and $800. In another move, a carrier used hydraulics on the trailer to lower the load and passed under a bridge slowly to minimize bouncing. This case also required state police to escort the load and required that the load move at night. The additional cost to move under the bridge was $12,500 because of the delay and the additional police escort cost. Both cases allowed the carrier to pass the overhead structure safely when there was either no alternative rout- ing available or the alternative was significantly longer and therefore more expensive than the option used. Figure A-47. Minimum clearance required for overheight loads.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 149 Impact of Frost Restrictions on OSOW Planning and Permitting Frost restrictions vary by state, requiring OSOW carriers to carefully plan moves to account for state-by-state differ- ences. For example, when frost restrictions are in force, Minnesota and Michigan limit the width and axle weights of the load allowed to travel on state highways. During this period, a load which is more than 14 ft wide in Michigan and 16 ft wide in Minnesota would be unable to move in the state. Carriers will route around states with frost restrictions in order to complete their load. For example, a 16 ft load from Green Bay, Wisconsin, to Billings, Montana, would need to wait for the restriction to be lifted or route around Minnesota using Illinois, Iowa, South Dakota, Wyoming, and finally Montana. The frost restriction route adds 30% more miles and costs anywhere from an additional $2,500 to $5,000 depending on the size of the load, according to industry sources. For loads that are only overweight, carriers will use longer trailers with more axles to reduce the overall weight per axle. For instance, an overweight truck with a gross vehicle weight of 135,000 lbs would normally be hauled by a 7-axle trailer, but under frost restrictions a carrier would use a 13-axle trailer. As the size of the trailer increases, it crosses the threshold for one escort and requires two in some other states. Between the increased cost of using a larger trailer and the escort cost, moving from a 7-axle to a 13-axle trailer can cost an additional $2,000 per day. and others leave it to the carrier’s discretion. Minimum clearance is widely varied throughout the United States with pockets of states ranging from three to four having similar regulations. Frost/Spring/Thaw Restrictions Frost/Spring/Thaw Restrictions (frost restrictions) are seasonal weight restrictions, most common in Northern states, to protect roadways during the thaw. Generally, frost restrictions start in early March and typically last eight weeks. Frost restrictions are kept in place until the roads, shoulders, and ground are thawed and dry, but can be reinstated if low temperatures refreeze the ground. Frost restrictions directly affect the configuration that an OSOW carrier uses when moving a load. States vary the size and implementation of the restriction. Some states such as Minnesota split the roadway network into zones, so restrictions can independently be lifted in a zone that is fully thawed. Other states specify the roadways that are restricted, placing all primary and secondary roadways under restriction, or gradually relax the restriction as the ground thaws. Finally, frost restrictions can be set by municipalities or counties on roadways regardless of whether the state has or had its own frost restriction. Coordination among jurisdictions is another challenge for carriers. For example, a state per- mit may specify a route that detours a load off a state-maintained roadway and onto a local road to avoid a frost-restricted road. Yet the local roadway could also be under frost restrictions, mak- ing that route unfeasible and requiring amending or refiling of a permit. During the permitting process, the applicant would have to check local restrictions as part of permitting the OSOW load to use local roads. While inconvenient, a much larger issue arises if restrictions are put in place while a load is being transported. At this point, a carrier may be knowingly or unknowingly violating the frost restriction. This is also an issue for carriers with multi-trip permits that may or may not have to submit the routes of their loads when approved. Ultimately, frost restrictions rely on communication between the state, counties, and carriers to both protect the roadways and ensure that loads are moving as efficiently as possible.

150 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-48 displays states with frost restrictions on local, state, or county roadways. Frost restrictions are focused in the Northern states where there are low enough temperatures to freeze the ground. Frost laws can be variable in timing and apply to different roadways. A number of states such as Vermont, Illinois, and Ohio have restrictions only on roadways not maintained by the state, such as city or county roadways. Lift-Axle Restrictions OSOW carriers use a variety of different axle types in order to meet axle weight restrictions and to be able to traverse a variety of infrastructure. Lift axles allow the carrier to spread the load over an additional axle; lowering the lift axle achieves this, and enables meeting the maximum weights within the state. Figure A-49 is an example of a lift axle in the up position on a semi- truck. The user of the lift-axle trailer has the option of making the final axle grouping a tandem or tridem. Figure A-48. Frost/spring/thaw restrictions.

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 151 Most states allow lift axles, with most placing no additional restrictions on the positioning of the lift axle. Some states allow lift axles, but carriers are directed to keep them in the position described in the permit. Additionally, a number of states allow lift axles at only a fraction of the weight they allow when adding a standard axle to an axle grouping. For example, Oklahoma allows lift axles, but if they are controlled in the cab, the axle only counts for 8,000 lbs when distributing the load. In this case, carriers need to calculate how the lift axle will be counted and how that affects their ability to receive a permit and travel through multiple states. Figure A-50 displays the states that allow and do not allow lift axles. Most states allow lift axles, many with restrictions on their position. Overall, only four do not allow lift axles. Truck Configuration Restrictions A variety of truck configurations are used to move superloads throughout the United States. Superload configurations must meet axle weight restrictions and be maneuverable enough to navi- gate the infrastructure along the route. Superload trailers come in two varieties: long and wide. Long configurations use anywhere from seven to 19 axles to spread the weight of the load. Wide configurations or dual-lane configurations use trunnion axles to spread the weight of the load over many axles and across a wide portion of the roadway, but are shorter (Figure A-51). Depending on their infrastructure, states will limit the use of 19-axle loading or dual-lane loading. Carriers need to know the configurations allowed within the state to determine the movement of superloads. Figure A-49. Truck with lift axle in up position. Source: Perkins Motor Transport Impact of Lift Axles on OSOW Configuration and Movement If carriers move an OSOW load from Illinois to Ohio, and the weight on the rear axle grouping is 50,000 lbs, they are under the legal limit for a tandem axle, allowing them to place the lift axle in the up position, thereby saving wear and tear on the tires and trailer. As soon as the load reaches the Indiana border, they are over the maximum weight for a tandem and need to drop the lift axle to make the trailer a tridem trailer that is now permitted to travel in Indiana. The same is true for Ohio, where they would keep the lift axle down.

152 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Figure A-50. Lift axle regulation. Figure A-51. Dual-lane loading. Source: Perkins Motor Transport

Inventory of OSOW Truck Permitting Differences 153 The difference between long trailers and dual-lane trailers is primarily their length, width, and weight. Dual-lane trailers are 6 ft to 10 ft wider, 60 ft to 80 ft shorter, and around 40,000 lbs lighter. Often wide trailers with trunnion axles are the only option for moving heavy loads as they can maneuver turns that long trailers cannot. With the exception of Connecticut and Rhode Island, most states allow dual-lane loading. But many states mentioned that bridges were the biggest impediment to dual-lane loading. Virginia allows dual-lane loading but requires bridge engineers to grant its use, and it is not typically recommended. North Dakota stated that its system and bridges are not set up for dual-lane loading and each load requires a special bridge analysis to be approved. Expanding on this point, an industry representative noted that generally 19-axle configurations are favored east of the Mississippi whereas dual-lane loading is favored west of the Mississippi. A 19-axle configuration spreads the weight of the load over a longer distance and is able to carry heavy loads lower than a dual-lane loading configuration. Carriers use their experience in permitting when deciding on a truck configuration. This experience is vital to deciding whether to use dual-lane loading or 19-axle configurations in order to maximize the chance that a permit will be approved. Single-Trip OSOW Permit Fee The cost of a single-trip OSOW permit varies throughout the United States. A 2013 study of the costs to permit OSOW loads in the Midwest found that the difference in the cost of permit- ting an OSOW load ranged from $10 to $1,779, depending on the load and the state.6 The dif- ference in the cost stems from different approaches to OSOW permitting fees. Generally, states use one of three approaches to assessing a permit fee: • Flat fee, • Incremental cost, or • Flat fee and incremental cost. A flat fee means that all loads that fit in a category are charged the same fee. For example, Iowa charges $10 regardless of the size or weight of an OSOW load. Similarly, Kansas charges $20 for an OSOW permit, and when a load is classified as a superload, the cost increases to $50. Incremental permitting costs are those that do not have a fixed fee and vary based on dimen- sions, weight, and/or miles. For example, Washington charges an increasing fee per mile as the weight of an OSOW load increases. Lastly, some states charge a flat fee up to a size and/or weight threshold and then begin charging incremental costs. For example, Maryland charges $30 for an OSOW permit and $5 for every 2,000 lbs above 80,000 lbs. Most states have a base permit fee and add an incremental cost that make larger and heavier vehicles more costly to permit, with an incremental fee based on weight as the most frequent additional cost. Figure A-52 displays the flat fees charged throughout the United States. Note that most states charge additional incremental fees above the initial permitting fee. Also note that the initial fee is only the beginning of the cost of an OSOW permit in many states. Depending on the load, the cost of the incremental charge can greatly outweigh the initial permitting fee. 6 Adams, T., E. Perry, A. Schwartz, B. Gollnik, M. Kang, J. Bittner, and S. Wagner. Aligning Oversize/Overweight Permit Fees with Agency Costs: Critical Issues, 2013. http://wisdotresearch.wi.gov/wp-content/uploads/WisDOT-CFIRE-project-0092-10-21- final-report.pdf. Accessed October 27, 2014.

154 Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Single-Trip OSOW Permit Fee Single-Trip OSOW Permit Fee Figure A-52. Single-trip OSOW permit fee.

Next: Appendix B - Global Scan of Best Practices and Lessons for the United States »
Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 830: Multi-State, Multimodal, Oversize/Overweight Transportation is a compilation of existing permitting requirements for the transportation of oversize/overweight (OSOW) freight throughout the United States. It identifies and presents information about state-by-state differences in OSOW road transportation regulations and permitting practices, and the challenges these differences may pose for carriers. It discusses factors affecting modal competitiveness in OSOW transportation as well as opportunities for improved modal access. The report also discusses ongoing and potential opportunities to improve information and procedural applications, covering the permitting process and the need for improved communication and coordination.

Accompanying this report is a website with maps illustrating the variety and range of OSOW regulations across the United States.

The information contained on this website is current as of August 2016. This website is offered as is, without warranty or promise of support of any kind either expressed or implied. Under no circumstance will the National Academy of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine or the Transportation Research Board (collectively "TRB") be liable for any loss or damage caused by the installation or operation of this product. TRB makes no representation or warranty of any kind, expressed or implied, in fact or in law, including without limitation, the warranty of merchantability or the warranty of fitness for a particular purpose, and shall not in any case be liable for any consequential or special damages.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!