Rail Exec Suggests Weight Limits Could Be Raised by Up to 10%

This story appears in the Nov. 23 print edition of Transport Topics.

ANAHEIM, Calif. — BNSF Railway Vice President Steve Branscum called on truckers and shippers to jointly pinpoint areas where freight weight limits could be raised, perhaps by 10%.

“As industry professionals, we ought to try and come up with solutions that really work. There are clearly some areas that could use higher weights,” Branscum said, citing moves between ports and distribution centers and some forest products moves. He added that package carriers see opportunities to run triple trailers.

Speaking at the Intermodal Expo/TransComp here, Branscum, who is BNSF’s group vice president for consumer products, said the rails’ current equipment fleet could handle approximately 10% heavier shipments.

That would mean an additional 8,000 pounds over the current 80,000-pound weight limit. That limit has been a bone of contention between railroads, which want to preserve it, and an alliance of shippers and many truckers who want to boost the weight to 97,000 pounds as part of the reauthorization of federal surface transportation funding.

“Everybody in this room, whether it’s a trade organization or a shipper, probably haven’t done what we can or should do to address this issue,” said Branscum. “The reality is that if we are all honest, there are applications where size-and-weight changes make sense, but people talk about the issue” on a more generic nationwide basis.

“If the trucking industry, led by the ATA and shippers, could identify those areas and say ‘this is all we need’ . . . that is something we should all talk about,” Branscum said. “You can’t go from current limits to something astronomical.”

“BNSF has been a leader in looking forward, rather than backward, in seeking solutions to our nation’s transportation challenges,” said Tim Lynch, senior vice president of federation relations and strategic planning for American Trucking Associations. “More importantly, this statement suggests a willingness to look at specific ideas for working together.”

Wayne Johnson, director of logistics for American Gypsum Co. and an advocate of the higher weight limits, praised Branscum’s initiative.

“What [Branscum] is saying is exactly right,” Johnson said. “I hope this will bring the railroads to the table. It’s a good idea. We should all sit down and come up with an agreement. ATA has to be part of it.”

Jeff Hoy, senior manager of Western Division transportation for Home Depot, also campaigned for the 97,000-pound limit, which would reduce costs for the 3 million flatbed freight loads the retailer moves a year, including dirt, wallboard and other goods.

However, four rail panelists hewed to the Association of American Railroads’ long-standing position that truck size and weight should continue to be frozen at 80,000 pounds.

James Hertwig, president of CSX Intermodal, noted that the Truckload Carriers Association does not support the idea of raising weight limits.

“We are the only ones with self-funded infrastructure,” said Brian McDonald, vice president of intermodal for Union Pacific Railroad. “We believe higher truck weights should pay for themselves.”

James Bolander, assistant vice president at Norfolk Southern, explained the rails’ stance this way: “The public policy issue is paramount. Where does the country want to put its resources? There are opportunities [in a reauthorization] for a more efficient rail network to thrive.”

Bolander also noted that heavier weights would force redesign of intermodal equipment that would be costly for the railroads.

“I do get concerned as a citizen about the safety of trucks,” said Canadian National’s James Cairns, assistant vice president of intermodal and ground transportation.