Size and Weight Enforcement and Regulations

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FEDERAL HIGHWAY ADMINISTRATION Docket No. FHWA-2006-24134: Size and Weight Enforcement and Regulations COMMENTS OF THE AMERICAN BUS ASSOCIATION IN RESPONSE TO NOTICE OF PROPOSED RULEMAKING June 2006 The American Bus Association (ABA or Association) is pleased to offer these comments in response to the Federal Highway Administration?s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking in the above-titled proceeding. The ABA?s comments are focused on the two provisions in the Notice that deal specifically with over-the-road buses. These are the proposed definition of ?over-the-road bus? (OTRB) contained in 23 C.F.R. section 658.5 and the proposed implementation of the partial statutory exemption from state axle weight limits for OTRBs contained in 23 C.F.R. 658.17(k). In addition, ABA will address the issue raised in a letter to the FHWA from the Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS). The ABA is the premier private bus industry trade association. The ABA is home to some 3500-member companies and organizations and approximately 800 bus operator companies. The bus operator members provide all manner of transportation services to the public including: fixed route schedule service, charter and tour, airport shuttle and commuter services. Many of our members use over- the-road buses in their operations. ABA compliments FHWA on its proposal for these two OTRB provisions. We believe that FHWA has appropriately defined the term ?over-the-road bus? and has properly implemented the OTRB partial axle weight exemption. The Association does have one change to recommend in the exemption provision. With respect to the proposed section 658.5 OTRB definition, this proposal incorporates the statutory definition of OTRB contained in the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) 42 U.S.C. section 121815(5). See, 71 Fed. Reg. at 25519. So far as ABA is aware this is the only federal statutory definition of OTRB. That definition is: ?a bus characterized by an elevated passenger deck located over a baggage compartment?. ABA believes that this definition is accurate and needs nothing further. However, the FHWA?s proposal to add: ?typically operating on the Interstate System of roads previously designated as making up the Federal-aid Primary System? while not essential to the definition does not appear to detract from the meaning of OTRB as these buses do typically, but not exclusively, operate on these roads. With respect to the exemption language in proposed section 658.17(k), this language, with the exception of one word, properly implements the statutory changes affecting OTRB axle weights. FHWA?s discussion of the proposed change in Section 658.17(See, 71 Fed. Reg. at 22519) accurately describes these statutory changes. In sum, the discussion notes that Congress exempted OTRBs and transit vehicles from the federal axle weight limits until October 1, 2009 and that in the FY 2006 transportation appropriations law (Public Law 109-115), Congress limited the extent to which certain states could enforce OTRB and transit bus axle weight limits. Public Law 109-115 prohibits a ?covered state? from enforcing a single axle weight limit on OTRBs and transit buses of less than 24,000 pounds. The law defines a ?covered state? to be one that enforced a single axle weight limit of 20,000 pounds or greater, but less than 24,000 pounds, in the period beginning October 6, 1992, and ending November 30, 2005. While proposed section 658.17(k) properly implements this statutory limitation, it applies the limitation to states that have enforced a 20,000-24,000 pound axle weight limit ?during? the October 6, 1992-November 30, 2005, time period, rather than ?in? that period. ABA believes that Congress specifically used the word ?in? to make it plain that a covered state included any state that enforced such a limit at any point in the specified time period, not just, as the word ?during? at least implies, either du…