As top ITD officials, including Director Brian Ness, Deputy Director Scott Stokes and the state Transportation Board, make presentations to a joint meeting of the House and Senate transportation committees this afternoon, lawmakers asked about the megaloads that ITD just approved to travel on U.S. Highway 12 in north-central Idaho. The decision covers just the four loads proposed by ConocoPhillips to go from Lewiston to its Billings, Mont. oil refinery, but ExxonMobil also has plans pending for 207 more giant loads on the same route, from Lewiston to Montana and then up to its Alberta oil sands project in Canada. Sen. Elliot Werk, D-Boise, asked, "How are you guaranteeing that these loads, especially if there are 200 or more of them ... how are your guaranteeing that the damage ... will be repaired without the taxpayers picking up the bill?"

Ness responded that multiple axles will spread the weight of the extra-large loads, which are so big they'll take up both lanes of the two-lane route. "Probably you'd find that there's less damage being done to the road on a per-axle basis than you'd probably find on a normal vehicle going down the highway," Ness said. He added that the megaloads are among the "most-inspected" loads, and said the state is requiring a "significant bond" to cover any road damage. He said the most likely damage would be to shoulders if the loads stray off the road.

Sen. John McGee, R-Caldwell, said, "I want to congratulate you on your decision." He said the United States can't continue to rely on foreign oil from places like Iran, and instead should be looking to "our friends in the north," referring to the Canadian oil sands project. "This is a no-brainer for the security of this nation, so I congratulate you for your decision," McGee said.

Rep. Shirley Ringo, D-Moscow, said, "Most situations are sufficiently interesting that I don't consider them to be a no-brainer." Ringo said she attended an early meeting in the region on the loads, and, "It really seemed to many of us there, at least to that stage, there was a lack of process." The department at that point had no answers on what would happen if there was an accident, she said, and no information about the bond that eventually was required. "It wasn't a particularly good start," Ringo said. "I hope at the end that there will be a process in place that can be made clear to everybody and we can get some comfort with it." Ness responded that with possible litigation, "When we get to the point of ITD defending or changing its process, that's probably something that I shouldn't comment on at this point."