Office of Operations Freight Management and Operations
Table of Contents

Best Practices in Permitting of Oversize and Overweight Vehicles: Final Report

CHAPTER 5: REVIEW OF STATE OVERSIZE/OVERWEIGHT PERMITTING SYSTEMS

As noted, the results of the previous components of the environmental scan identified topics and issues to explore with States that have implemented and are using automated permitting systems. The automated permitting process comprised four components which were grouped into the previously identified topics and issues. The resulting list guided the interviews with the selected States.

The Specialized Carrier & Rigging Association identified the key States to include in the study. The rationale for this is that the industry deals with State permitting agencies and automated State permitting systems on a daily basis and has the most experience with those States and systems that offer the potential for identifying best practices.

Once this list had been compiled, a subset of States were identified that included ones using systems provided by each of the primary oversize/overweight (OS/OW) permitting system vendors and one State that developed its own system. Using these combined criteria, five States were identified as being highly representative for inclusion in the study: Kansas, Iowa, Illinois, Texas, and Nebraska.

In addition, several States that met the additional criteria were identified in the Work Plan for the study, in particular, those that offered a potential best practice for issuing OS/OW permits for ports. Maryland issues permits for the Port of Baltimore and was therefore included in the study.

The State of North Dakota was also selected for inclusion in the study. The threshold limits that States set for auto-permitting systems vary significantly; there is a continuing dichotomy between States interested in protecting infrastructure and those with industry-driven interests in expanding permit thresholds available through automated systems. North Dakota is a State that has set limits at much higher levels than most other States and could thus serve as a potential example of a best practice in this area.

Finally, the State of Georgia issues permits on behalf of local agencies. A concern noted by the industry was the challenge in obtaining local permits for moves off of the State highway system. Some issues include identifying the point of contact to obtain the permit or having access to information about permit requirements. The State of Georgia offered an additional opportunity to identify a best practice; in this case, how the State and local jurisdictions established the protocols for "one-stop-shop" permitting.

The four components and topics/issues included:

  1. Automated Route Identification.
    • Does the State route map include all State and local roads?
    • How does the State coordinate, if at all, the State and local permit requirements?
      • Does the State issue local permits?
      • Does the State include hyperlinks to local permitting agencies?
    • Does the State auto-issue route permits?
    • Does the State identify route restrictions?
      • Are permanent restrictions, such as bridge height or per axle and gross vehicle weight (GVW) weight limits identified?
    • Are temporary restrictions, such as construction, work zones, weather events, or traffic incidents identified?
  2. Thresholds.
    • What is the threshold and how was it established (include height, weight, width, and length)?
    • What were the criteria for setting the threshold?
    • What type of analysis was completed?
    • Who was involved in determining the thresholds?
    • Have the thresholds been changed since they were first established and if so, why?
    • Have the established thresholds reduced the number of incidents involving OS/OW loads such as reduced infrastructure damage or fewer hits related to height- or width-related hits?
  3. Application Process.
    • User interface.
      • Quality of graphics and maps.
      • Ease of use.
    • Edit checks.
    • Library function – ability to store.
      • Previous routes or permits.
      • Company data.
      • Power units and trailer configurations.
  4. System Operations.
    • Data quality.
    • Types of payments accepted.
    • Notification of real-time changes in route restrictions and changes in permit status.

Previous | Next
Office of Operations