Cooperative Research for Hazardous Materials Transportation: Defining the Need, Converging on Solutions -- Special Report 283 (2005)

As described in the preceding chapter, many federal agencies sponsor research related to the transportation of hazardous materials. Most of this research is focused on meeting the needs of each agency’s own regulatory, inspection, and enforcement programs. Inasmuch as most agencies’ mandates are limited to specific undertakings, such as promoting safety in a particular transport mode, protecting the environment, or ensuring transport security, their research tends to be programmed accordingly.

The mission-oriented research of federal agencies is essential but may not be sufficient. Gaps can occur where agency responsibilities do not overlap or where problems cut across agency missions. In such instances, no one agency may have the incentive or authority to address the problem. Hazardous materials are moved by multiple modes of transportation and they pose multiple risks. Actions taken to improve the safety of transporting hazardous materials can affect other kinds of risks. For example, traffic may be diverted to routes in environmentally sensitive areas. Thus, problems should be viewed from multiple perspectives and with regard to multiple goals. For example, from the standpoint of emergency personnel responding to a tank car derailment, the placard affixed to the car offers crucial notice of a potential hazard; but to those concerned about homeland security, the placarding system may be viewed as aiding terrorists in identifying hazardous cargo targets. In such instances collaboration is essential in finding and implementing solutions.

In addition to federal agencies, thousands of state and local governments, carriers, shippers, and makers of containers and vehicles conduct research to meet their own particular needs. This research is also essential. Much of it is aimed at providing solutions to the specific needs of those conducting the research. At the same time, many of these entities

may experience similar problems and have many of the same research needs. Some of the research undertaken is likely to be duplicative, and some shared research needs that are obvious when viewed collectively may not be addressed at all because no one entity has the incentive or resources to do so. Research to develop models for estimating hazardous materials traffic types and flows in local areas, for example, is of great interest to most states and localities because it is helpful in emergency response plans and preparations. While development of such means may be impractical for any one state or locality, it may be feasible and cost-effective for many jurisdictions working together.

The preceding examples reveal opportunities for cooperative research, not only among federal agencies with related missions but also among carriers, shippers, packaging suppliers, and state and local agencies that have important roles in the transportation of hazardous materials. The opportunities for cooperation cut across government jurisdictional levels and the public and private sectors.

This does not imply that all, or even most, research needs are best addressed through cooperation. Federal agencies must retain an ability to undertake research that meets their own program and policy needs, and private entities must engage in research and development to further their own proprietary products. The involvement of multiple parties may not be conducive to longer-range research, which is inherently risky. Each party may have a different level of risk acceptance and a different planning horizon. An urgent problem may require an organization to proceed too quickly with research to collaborate with others.

The remainder of this chapter provides examples of the kinds of problems and needs that are well suited to cooperative research. The examples were derived from the stakeholder workshop held in conjunction with this study, a review of previous efforts to examine the concept of a hazardous materials cooperative research program, and the expertise and insights of committee members. The examples concern subject matter that is likely to be of interest to many parties and that can be investigated with a reasonable expenditure of time and effort. They cover a spectrum of needs. Some are technical in nature while others are oriented toward policy and management needs; some address longer-term planning needs while others are concerned with near-term decision making.

There are many ways to sort the examples to facilitate discussion, since they encompass a wide range of subjects. The groupings used here focus on data and analysis for policy making and regulation, planning and preparing for emergencies, and supporting first response. These three groupings are subsets of broader categories of research that could be undertaken as part of a national cooperative research program. A cooperative research program could be envisioned that is built around such important categories as (a) improving tools and data for risk analysis; (b) analyzing causal relationships for planning and standard-setting; and (c) developing field manuals, guidebooks, and other practitioner guidance. Each of these broad categories would be of interest to a cross section of public agencies at all jurisdictional levels and to hazardous materials carriers, shippers, makers of packaging, and others in industry.

Project ideas offered by stakeholders at the workshop are listed in Box 4-1. The annex to this chapter goes a step further and turns nine ideas into more defined problem statements and project descriptions. They are provided to better illustrate the kinds of projects that a cooperative research program might undertake, the array of organizations and expertise that must be part of the effort, and the kinds of products that cooperative research projects would yield.

In March 2000, the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT) conducted an evaluation of its hazardous materials transportation programs. The evaluation team found that programs “lack the departmentwide strategic planning and direction to ensure effective deployment of resources, and there are not reliable and sufficient data upon which to make informed program decisions” (DOT 2000, ii). The team’s report went on to document gaps and inconsistencies in program objectives and priorities. It recommended that institutional capacity be developed within DOT to administer a coordinated hazardous materials program.

Coordinating hazardous materials programs and regulations at the federal level has grown even more challenging since the U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) was created in 2002. DHS now shares responsibility for ensuring the secure transportation of hazardous

materials with DOT. Within each department, numerous agencies have specific authorities pertaining to hazardous materials security. Hazardous materials security is a direct concern of DOT’s Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA), which has issued rules requiring that shippers and carriers of certain highly hazardous materials develop and implement security plans and that all shippers and carriers

of hazardous materials ensure that employee training programs include a security component. The Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA) has met with more than 40,000 motor carriers to encourage voluntary steps to improve security. The Federal Railroad Administration is working with the Association of American Railroads (AAR) to assess security risks and implement measures to reduce them.

Within DHS, the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) has established requirements for operators of ports, terminals, and vessels to develop comprehensive security plans and response capabilities. Other DHS agencies, especially the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection, have security programs and requirements related to hazardous cargoes. As mentioned previously, TSA has focused its attention on securing specific elements of the transportation system. While its aviation activities remain prominent, the securing of hazardous materials has emerged as one of the agency’s highest priorities.

With so many agencies having so many related roles and responsibilities, the need for coordinating policies, programs, and regulations is easy to see. Coordination is crucial to ensure that individual decisions by agencies do not work at cross purposes, that resources are complementary across programs and departments, and that risks are managed in a harmonious way.

Cooperative research could provide policy makers with information and analyses to make regulatory and investment decisions that cut across program areas. In particular, the threat of terrorism requires explicit consideration of how safety performance translates into security performance. For example, should standards and practices governing the safe containment, handling, and routing of certain materials be subject to additional criteria associated with reducing vulnerability to sabotage, hijacking, or attack? Should programs designed to educate and train all transportation personnel (in addition to hazardous materials employees) in safety awareness also contain training to raise security awareness? Should evacuation planning for hazardous materials incidents cover public gathering places as well as more typical hazardous materials transportation routes and production and storage facilities?

Research projects identified by workshop participants that could be helpful in this regard are as follows:

• A comprehensive review of federal and international regulatory programs and activities that affect safety, security, and efficiency of hazardous materials transportation, including identification of gaps and overlapping functions;

• An international scan of efforts to harmonize hazardous materials safety and security regulations and to share information in support of compatible regulation;

• A comparison of analysis methods used in evaluating safety and security risks to help develop crosscutting risk analysis models to inform decisions; and

• A review of anticipated changes in the types and quantities of hazardous materials being transported and how they are likely to affect safety and security and the need for changes in federal regulatory and budgetary emphasis.

One ambitious proposed project, which is defined in more detail in Annex 4-1, would entail an assessment of opportunities to integrate and supplement safety and security measures for hazardous materials transportation (Project 1). This research could provide the basis for developing a more comprehensive approach to hazardous materials transportation regulation that addresses safety, environment, and security concerns.

Several candidate projects on risk data and analysis are included among the nine projects listed in Annex 4-1. One entails the development of a database on large-truck crashes for use in risk analyses (Project 2). Another would produce recommendations for possible design and funding alternatives for a nationwide system to collect and analyze performance data on bulk containers so that conditional release probabilities could be determined for alternative container designs (Project 3). Another project would produce a manual that shows correlations between incident risks and consequences for shippers and carriers to use in making routing decisions and for public agencies to use in regulatory analysis (Project 4). Another focuses on developing an environmental hazardous assessment system that will allow shippers, carriers, and regulators to compare and classify the environmental hazards posed by materials in transportation more objectively (Project 5).

One of the proposed projects would help in providing the statistical basis for these kinds of risk assessments by examining ways to collect more accurate data for the evaluation of hazardous materials traffic, incident rates, and release probabilities on a systemwide basis, including ways to harmonize existing databases (now maintained by multiple agencies) so that they use more common definitions, assumptions, and frameworks (Project 6).

Over time, the federal government has taken a more prominent role in encouraging adequate planning and preparation for hazardous materials incidents. Nevertheless, such planning remains largely the responsibility of state and local governments. Since passage of the federal Superfund Amendment and Reauthorization Act of 1986, most local governments, with the assistance of industry, have developed local emergency planning committees (LEPCs) and mutual-aid networks that can provide special equipment and personnel to hazardous materials transportation incidents. State emergency response committees (SERCs) and emergency management agencies coordinate these local efforts across the state to ensure that gaps do not exist. Thus, emergency planning involves thousands of entities across the country, many of which have similar responsibilities, problems, and needs.

Several cooperative research projects were identified by workshop participants to improve emergency planning and preparation for hazardous materials incidents involving transportation. Much of the emphasis of these projects is on improving the information and analytic tools available for such planning. Perhaps the most straightforward was a recommendation for research to survey best practices in the sharing of information on hazardous materials shipments among industry and the public sector. Another called for a baseline examination of how SERCs and LEPCs around the country use hazardous materials traffic data for emergency response planning. Another called for an evaluation of how emergency planners might use information derived from electronic shipping papers to gain a better understanding of the quantities and kinds of hazardous materials passing through their jurisdictions. Project ideas were also proposed to improve the analytic tools available to emergency planners, including a review of nonproprietary risk assessment models that can be made more widely available to public and private

entities and a review of models used to predict the consequences of various hazardous materials scenarios and how to translate these results into planning and support for decision making.

Among the project ideas detailed in Annex 4-1, two are especially pertinent to emergency planning and response. One seeks to identify best practices for estimating hazardous commodity flows for use by state and local emergency response planners in locating response capabilities in the areas most likely to need them (Project 7). Another entails a national assessment of hazardous materials response capabilities, coupled with recommendations on ways to fill any gaps and maintain up-to-date information on coverage (Project 8).

Workshop participants also offered ideas on projects that might be helpful in preparing and planning for emergencies arising from terrorist attacks on hazardous materials shipments. One proposed the development of models to predict possible targets of hijacked vehicles containing hazardous materials. Another called for a review of technologies for tracking the location of tank trucks and railroad tank cars, including possible uses of geographic information systems (GIS) such as the Global Positioning System (GPS) for real-time monitoring of hazardous materials shipments. Another called for case studies of how various segments of the hazardous materials community have implemented security measures, which would be helpful in finding cost-effective approaches.

The performance of first responders is crucial to the overall system for ensuring the safety and security of hazardous materials shipments. Consequently, many of the federal regulations governing hazardous materials transportation pertain to emergency response, especially to the communication of hazard information to first responders. DOT requires that shipments be accompanied by papers containing information on the quantity of the hazardous material; the material’s description, hazard class, and identification number; and a 24-hour emergency telephone number of someone knowledgeable about the material. The regulations also require that packages and containers carrying regulated materials be labeled with similar information and that warning placards be displayed on the vehicles. The color-coded, diamond-shaped placards contain symbols that indicate the presence of particular hazards.

For first responders, who are often local police and firefighters, the sight of a placard on a vehicle or a label on a container may be the only warning of the presence of hazardous materials. Most state and local police and fire departments have copies of DOT’s Emergency Response Guidebook, which they can consult for basic response information, including initial precautions and protective measures to take. The guidebook is meant to be augmented by expert technical advice, which can be obtained through CHEMTREC and other hot line services provided by industry.¹

Once a hazardous materials incident is recognized, first responders are trained to take initial protective actions and seek the assistance of those competent and equipped to respond. The strongest preparations tend to be in large communities, which often have special hazardous materials response teams as part of local fire departments or mutual-aid networks. Preparations are usually weakest in rural areas, where local fire departments are often manned by volunteers who may have limited training or equipment to handle hazardous materials incidents. Often state authorities are called in to assist in responding to incidents occurring in rural areas. Some states have established hazardous materials response teams to assist in major emergencies, which may require the involvement of state police, fire marshals, emergency management agencies, and environmental and health agencies.

Shippers and carriers have important roles in responding to emergencies. They are familiar with the materials, the equipment, and the operating environment. Many large carriers (especially railroads) and major chemical suppliers have specially trained emergency response teams on call. Because they operate over fixed routes and carry large quantities of hazardous materials, railroads are more likely than trucking companies to have personnel and equipment available for emergency response. Most railroads work with local jurisdictions in planning for responses to incidents. Many large shippers can also provide emergency response teams, and the chemical industry maintains a national chain of emergency response teams (CHEMNET) that can be deployed in a matter of hours to chemical emergencies around the country.

This abridged description of the system to inform first responders suggests the importance of research that involves the cooperation of

diverse interests and expertise. For example, decisions about the design of placards, the information in shipping papers, and the content and format of the Emergency Response Guidebook require not only sound analysis but also input and advice from those who must apply the information in the field. Emergency response information is an area with a clear need for objective analyses that use the expertise and gain the acceptance of many diverse communities.

Several project ideas were offered by workshop participants concerning improvements in the capabilities of emergency responders, including those arriving first at the scene. One called for an examination of technological and nontechnological means of improving the accuracy, accessibility, and timeliness of hazard information available to public safety officials. Another called for an evaluation of technologies, such as GPS, to develop and maintain a national database of public safety “answering points” along the nation’s rail, water, and highway systems for streamlining emergency contacts.

Among the projects detailed in Annex 4-1, one describes what would be an ongoing research activity to keep DOT’s Emergency Response Guidebook technically current and in a form that meets the needs of emergency responders (Project 9). This is a particularly good example of where cooperative research can confer benefits on all parties involved. DOT developed the Emergency Response Guidebook, but its primary users are local police and firefighters. Both developers and users of the information need access to expertise and knowledge gained from wide experience with a range of hazardous agents and response environments. A cooperative project that regularly brings these users together with technical experts on hazardous chemicals, regulators, and carriers and shippers would offer valuable perspectives on ways to improve this important source of response guidance.

DOT Department of Transportation

DOT. 2000. Departmentwide Program Evaluation of the Hazardous Materials Transportation Program. Washington, D.C., March.

This annex presents nine example projects that could be undertaken by a hazardous materials transportation cooperative research program. The project statements are modeled after those found in the National Cooperative Highway Research Program and the Transit Cooperative Research Program (both of which are described in the next chapter). The project topics were derived from earlier efforts to review the concept of a hazardous materials transportation cooperative research program (as noted in the Preface) and on the basis of the committee members’ expertise and experience. They are provided to illustrate the kinds of problems that a cooperative research program might address, the various tasks and participants that would be involved in the research, and the end products that could be expected. They are not offered as priority projects, and some may be inappropriate in scale and complexity for an applied cooperative research program. Approximations of project costs and duration are offered. The nine statements are numbered and titled as follows:

1. Assessment of Opportunities to Integrate and Supplement Safety and

   Security Measures for Hazardous Materials Transportation

2. Data on Predominant Traffic and Highway Geometric Characteristics in Large-Truck Crashes for Use in Risk Analysis

3. Recommendations for Development of Conditional Release Probabilities for Bulk Containers Involved in Transportation Accidents

4. Development of Correlations Between Incident Risks and Consequences to Aid in Decision-Making Models

1. Development of an Environmental Hazard Assessment System for the Transport of Hazardous Materials

2. Recommendations for Commercial Transportation Incident and Commodity Flow Data Collection and Reporting

1. Detailed Information for Conducting Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Studies

2. National Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Capability Assessment

1. Transportation Emergency Response Guidelines for Hazardous Materials

Project 1

Assessment of Opportunities to Integrate and Supplement Safety and Security Measures for Hazardous Materials Transportation (Two-Phase Project)

1. Identify areas where safety and security measures are compatible or may complement each other.

2. Identify areas where safety and security measures may conflict or where measures to enhance one may compromise the other.

3. Identify where security requirements warrant attention beyond what is required for safety performance.

4. Determine whether there should be any difference between the response to and remediation of “traditional” hazardous materials incidents and those resulting from terrorist attacks.

1. Outline a comprehensive approach to hazardous cargo transportation that addresses both safety and security issues.

1. Produce national standards formulae for rational state and local decisions about safety and security risks related to the movement of hazardous materials.

2. Produce a model for reasonable state and local risk response and management plans related to both safety and security needs.

In all 50 states and U.S. territories, the flow of commerce includes the movement of flammable, explosive, caustic, and biological materials that pose fundamental risks to the public if they are accidentally or deliberately released. At the same time, the continuous flow of these hazardous materials is essential to the strategic functions of the national economy and national defense. Risks to public health and safety are managed, minimized, and mitigated by systems for handling and moving hazardous materials with highly developed safety and accountability features. The excellent record of safety in these systems is largely due to the diligence of shippers and receivers working closely with federal, state, and local regulatory and enforcement agencies.

RSPA promulgates and enforces regulations for the safe transportation of hazardous materials. The regulations are harmonized with the standards and guidance of international organizations such as the United Nations, the International Civil Aviation Organization, and the International Maritime Organization. The carrier regulations are organized according to the transportation modes of rail, highway, air, and water. The modal agencies share in enforcement. All of the modal agencies are under DOT with the exception of USCG, which has transferred to DHS. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and Department of Labor (DOL) rules overlap with those for transportation in a few areas, particularly when materials are stored and in waste transport.

The threat of terrorism now requires a distinction that at once must be well measured and well managed. Making this distinction requires explicit

consideration of the extent to which the inherent safety of hazardous materials handling systems translates into satisfactory levels of security for hazardous materials in transit. For example, does a gasoline tank truck moving along a primary highway that is safe in structure and operation require additional protections to reduce vulnerabilities to attack, hijacking, or theft by terror-minded individuals or groups? Is a train consisting of 100 or more tank cars of propane and caustic materials passing through a highly populated area not only safe but also secure from attack?

There are few regulations specifically for hazardous materials transportation security. RSPA has a requirement for security plans. A recommendatory program is administered by FMCSA for highways. TSA set forth new requirements for issuance of hazardous endorsements to commercial driver’s licenses. USCG regulations implementing the Maritime Transportation Security Act address certain dangerous cargoes at marine terminals. USCG has requirements for ships carrying certain dangerous cargoes.

Safety and security regulations are promulgated and enforced by at least nine agencies under four departments of the federal government. More security regulations are expected. The multiplicity of regulating agencies gives rise to the risk that the security rules of one will negatively affect a safety issue addressed by the rules of another. It also raises the possibility that advantages to security offered by safety requirements will not be fully appreciated, and vice versa.

1. Review safety-related regulations of all agencies that address hazardous cargo transport and identify those that may affect security.

2. Assess the degree of that impact and whether it enhances or detracts from security.

3. Review security regulations of all agencies related to cargo transport. By using the information developed in Items 1 and 2, determine

   1. Whether the object of the regulation is already addressed by a safety regulation and

1. Document hazardous materials transit patterns, movements, marshaling, and “at rest” status.

2. Relate this information to population density and proximity to strategic infrastructure. Consider prevailing weather patterns, water flows, and so forth. (The process of focusing on the “presence and inventory” of hazardous materials in transit is likely to be revealing to most communities’ leadership.)

3. Identify critical strategically important movements (for example, an attack on a pipeline in a rural area could have crippling effects on the economy).

4. Offer strategies for assessing risks.

5. Offer strategies for addressing and managing risks that go beyond existing safety requirements as needed.

1. Produce a holistic analysis of existing and proposed regulations and laws that affect the security of hazardous materials in transportation.

2. Identify possible duplicative efforts and expenditure of resources by multiple agencies.

3. Produce indexed, searchable data for use by regulators and legislators.

1. National standards formulae for rational and objective community-based assessments of hazardous materials movements.

2. Model for state and local risk response and management plans.

• Carriers

• Shippers

• Importers and exporters

• Regulatory agencies

• Legislative staffs

• State and local governments

• $500,000 for first phase

• $500,000 for second phase

• 18 months for first phase

• 18 months for second phase

Project 2

Data on Predominant Traffic and Highway Geometric Characteristics in Large-Truck Crashes for Use in Risk Analysis

1. Compile existing data on the relationship between large-truck crash statistics and highway features and geometric/traffic characteristics.

2. Determine the usefulness of these data in performing risk analysis for large truck–involved crashes and for trucks involving hazardous materials versus other kinds of cargoes.

3. Propose a centralized large-truck crash database for risk analysis.

Geometric design features and certain traffic characteristics are important in the safe operation of large trucks on highways, particularly on two-lane

highways. Data on these geometric features and traffic characteristics are necessary to conduct risk analysis for various types of trucks traveling on highways with different geometric and traffic characteristics. Although several studies have been conducted on aspects of this topic, the available information is dispersed and presented in an uncoordinated manner. A comprehensive database that can be used directly to assess the risk of various truck types traveling under different conditions of traffic and geometric characteristics is not readily available. The suitability of the existing data for use in risk analysis is also not clear. There is a need to synthesize the available data and place them in a format suitable for risk analysis by type and severity of crash. This effort will determine the extent to which the existing data may be used for risk analysis.

1. Compile existing data on different types of large-truck crashes by type of truck and associated traffic and highway geometric characteristics.

2. Synthesize and present the data in a format suitable for risk analysis.

3. Determine the extent to which the data are suitable for risk analysis.

4. Document gaps and weaknesses in available databases that limit their use in risk analysis.

5. Propose a centralized large-truck database for risk analysis.

6. Develop a recommended research program leading to a centralized database of roadway features and geometric and traffic characteristics associated with large-truck crashes that can be used for risk analysis.

A report that

1. Documents the existing databases on the traffic and highway geometric features that are associated with large-truck crashes,

2. Documents the extent to which the existing data are suitable for risk analysis,

3. Documents the gaps and weaknesses in the available databases for risk assessment,

1. Describes a proposed centralized large-truck database for risk analysis, and

2. Describes a recommended research program that would lead to a centralized database suitable for risk analysis of the involvement of different types of large trucks in crashes.

• Highway shippers and carriers

• Federal, state, and local regulators

• LEPCs and other interest groups

• Technical and public policy analysts

• Departments of Energy and Defense, as well as other organizations with responsibility for the movement of hazardous materials

$550,000

24 months

Project 3

Recommendations for Development of Conditional Release Probabilities for Highway and Intermodal Bulk Containers Involved in Transportation Accidents

Provide documented recommendations on possible design and funding alternatives for a nationwide system to collect and analyze performance data of highway and intermodal bulk containers involved in transportation accidents, from which conditional release probabilities for various container design specifications (by transport mode) could be developed.

The expected performance of a package that is involved in a transportation accident is critical in the evaluation of risks. Of particular interest is the performance of bulk packages. Accurate data on the impact of various design specifications on release probability are essential for robust risk analyses and in enabling better packaging decisions by carriers, shippers, and regulators.

A long-standing private-sector initiative managed by the Railway Supply Institute (RSI) and AAR, known as the RSI-AAR Railroad Tank Car Safety Research and Test Project, has collected and analyzed damage reports on tank cars that are involved in railroad accidents, whether or not the damage resulted in a leak of contents. The RSI-AAR project has resulted in conditional release probabilities for tank cars with different design specifications and features, including overall release probabilities as well as probabilities by the location of the leak (shell, head, top or bottom fittings, or multiple locations). It also considers the effect of various mitigation options (such as increasing head or shell thickness, adding protection to valves and fittings, etc.) on lading loss.

However, no such project exists for tank trucks or portable tanks.² Risk estimates for these types of containers are often based on widely varying estimates and anecdotal information rather than on statistical or scientific analysis. Direct extrapolation from tank car data to other bulk containers is generally not advisable, since the forces involved in railroad and highway accidents may be of considerably different magnitude, and accident scenarios are quite different. In addition, portable tanks may be shipped by rail, highway, and marine modes, all of which involve different accident potentials and characteristics.

This research project will provide recommendations, guidance, and specifications for the collection and analysis of bulk container performance data. As part of this project, funding alternatives will be identified

and evaluated. Institutional barriers to data collection will be identified, and recommendations for overcoming them will be made. The project is a necessary and logical extension of other proposed projects involving the definition, collection, and analysis of mode- and infrastructure/ location-specific accident data.

Risk managers sometimes face the issue of the selection of transport mode. Conditional release probabilities developed for bulk containers should be reasonably comparable and consistent in terms of definitions. Therefore the project will develop definitions for critical elements and discuss (for the various alternatives proposed) the data or analytical adjustments that may be required to account for modal differences and reporting characteristics. For example, if reports of damaged containers form the basis for the analysis, how will the results be adjusted to consider the broader universe of containers that were involved in accidents (of the same definition) but not damaged?

Through the RSI-AAR project data and analyses, much effort has been expended in structuring a consistent and defendable approach to the development of conditional release probabilities for tank cars involved in accidents. This approach could be applicable to other containers and modes. Other approaches may also be appropriate and should be explored.

The successful implementation of the proposed reporting systems and associated data should support the identification and prioritization of risk reduction actions leading to fewer hazardous materials transportation accidents, releases, and consequences to human or environmental health.

1. Define project mission, scope, objectives, and deliverables.

2. Compile and assess current systems.

3. Compile and assess current data availability, validity, and comparability.

4. Interview stakeholders.

5. Develop draft recommendations.

6. Review draft recommendations with stakeholders and proposed process owners.

1. Refine recommendations.

2. Publish final report.

1. Recommendations for definitions of critical elements (accident, damage, release, conditional release probability, etc.).

2. Description of current systems and limitations.

3. Description of stakeholder needs.

4. Identification of specific data requirements.

5. Alternatives and recommendations for data collection and analysis processes.

6. Alternatives and recommendations for process owners, funding, managing, and reporting.

7. Final report.

8. Public presentation of recommendations.

• Shippers and associations

• Carriers and associations

• Bulk terminals and associations

• DOT

• National Transportation Safety Board

• Risk analysts

$75,000 to $100,000

Note: Since this project will only develop possible frameworks for an actual data collection and analysis program, the cost should not be high.

12 months

Project 4

Development of Correlations Between Incident Risks and Consequences to Aid in Decision-Making Models

Determination of the components of a model to validate risk and consequence analysis of rail and highway transportation of hazardous materials. The result should be readily adaptable to routing and regulatory analysis decisions.

Ground transportation of hazardous materials falls within the purview of DOT’s regulations. DOT’s 11 hazard classes (9 numeric and 2 worded) suffice for DOT purposes; however, risk decisions utilizing those generic categories can lead to overly general conclusions of consequence. Other agencies influence DOT regulations, such as EPA for hazardous substances. Modal considerations and release indices considering packaging requirements are also a component of risk analysis. This study will consider hazard categorization schemes that are constructed in a manner to facilitate consequence analysis.

Consequence analysis needs refinement with new methods of measurement. Fatalities may not be the best expression of consequence. A better measure may be total population exposure. The location of the spill and such information as the type of soil, closeness of aquatic features, and proximity to natural habitats should be taken into account for environmental purposes. On the basis of this refinement of consequence categories and designation of meaningful units of measure, these components can be combined into the final statement of the impact.

With coordination of risk and consequence analysis, qualified decisions can be made as to the routing of products and reductions of the identified risks and consequences. Such a rational approach could also aid in the development of regulations and in reasonable reactions and options to public outcries for mandatory routing decisions.

1. Review previous studies and current in-process efforts.

2. Categorize hazardous materials by consequence.

3. Develop impact of each of the categories in terms of life and environment.

4. Develop appropriate units of measure for the impact categories.

5. Perform quality assurance and reasonability checks on the combinations of hazardous materials categories and consequence estimates.

6. Obtain peer review and stakeholder review where appropriate.

7. Prepare final report.

Manual providing categories for evaluating hazardous materials and their effects on sensitive receptors (with units of measure).

• Carriers: rail, highway

• Shippers: all

• Regulators: EPA, DOT, DOE, state agencies

• Resource managers: local officials, USCG, Department of Interior, Bureau of Land Management

• Emergency preparedness planners

• Independent researchers and consultants

$250,000

18 months

Project 5

Development of an Environmental Hazard Assessment System for the Transport of Hazardous Materials

Development of a quantitative system or model that will allow carriers, shippers, analysts, and regulators to assess, compare objectively, and classify the environmental hazards posed by materials in transportation.

The specific objectives are as follows:

1. Identify the key parameters that should be used to determine the environmental hazards of a given material.

2. Develop a methodology for an environmental hazard index that provides an accurate estimation of relative hazards.

DOT’s classification system for hazardous materials focuses largely on criteria related to acute injury to human health or damage to property. However, many materials that are benign with regard to these two impacts may harm the environment. The high cost of many hazardous materials spills has been due to environmental impacts. Presently, many materials are classified by DOT as hazardous in transportation only by reference to the EPA hazardous substance list or to several other lists outside DOT. Some materials that may pose a threat to the environment are not included on any of DOT’s referenced lists and

thus may not be required to be regulated in transportation at all. In contrast to other DOT-regulated materials, there are no general tests or criteria to determine the extent of environmental hazard they may pose. A comprehensive basis for the quantification and ranking of the environmental hazards posed by various materials in transportation is needed. The development of such a system would provide carriers, shippers, regulators, risk analysts, and the public with an objective basis for evaluating and comparing the environmental risk posed by hazardous materials in transportation.

The system must allow the user to evaluate a large number of products spilled under a wide variety of environmental circumstances. The environmental hazards of concern include damage to natural resources, harm to flora and fauna, destabilization of ecosystems, and effects on human health due to exposure to contaminated soil and water. The system should recognize and account for the cost of the immediate impact on the environment and the cost of cleanup and restoration. It should account for and quantify spillage under a wide variety of environmental circumstances such as location characteristics that affect the consequence of a spill (surface conditions, soil type, groundwater depth, aquatic system characteristics, etc.). Related to this is the capability to quantify the geographic probability distribution of values for each environmental parameter that may interact with characteristics of the spilled material. A standardized set of data requirements, algorithms, and testing criteria should be developed for application to any material of concern. Such a system would adequately account for appropriate North American environmental regulations, as well as any international systems with which it would need to be harmonized.

1. Refine objective, description, tasks, deliverables, and scope.

2. Conduct a comprehensive literature search and review of the state of the art in relevant fields and contact people currently involved in assessing these hazards, and synthesize the results.

3. Characterize the receptors of interest and develop approaches to quantify the impact on each.

1. Characterize and quantify the hazards that apply to each receptor type.

2. Identify material parameters.

3. Develop a classification scheme relating the quantity of material spilled, material parameter values, and spill conditions to types of receptor and hazard combinations.

4. Develop requisite algorithms, models, and parameters.

5. Develop data and use models to analyze a representative group of hazardous materials.

6. Validate classification scheme with appropriate data for actual events.

7. Obtain peer review and stakeholder review where appropriate.

8. Prepare final reports that document methodologies, data, assumptions, model form and usage, interpretation of results, and validation results.

Reports and software providing detailed descriptions of the form, development, validation, and recommended use of the hazard classification scheme.

• Carriers

• Shippers

• Regulators: EPA, DOT, state agencies

• Resource managers: local officials, local industry, Bureau of Land Management, USCG, Department of Interior

• Emergency preparedness planners

• Independent researchers and consultants

$1,000,000

36 months

Project 6

Recommendations for Commercial Transportation Incident and Commodity Flow Data Collection and Reporting

Provide accurate data for the evaluation of hazardous materials transportation incident rates and release probabilities. Prepare documented recommendations for the collection of nationwide commercial transportation accident frequencies and traffic volumes for improved incident rates, release probabilities, and commodity flow data.

To assess transportation risks associated with various modal movements of hazardous materials, accurate data on incident rates and release probabilities are critical. A person performing risk assessments or making risk decisions must have answers to the following:

1. How many incidents happen along modal transportation routes each year? (In addition to incident data reported under 49 CFR 171.16, data should be collected from federal, state, and local authorities and other government agencies with incident reporting requirements concerning hazardous materials.)

2. If there is an incident, what are the chances that there will be a release of material?

3. How many miles per year do specific materials or classes of materials move along specific (or characteristic) transportation routes?

This project will provide recommendations, guidance, and specifications for the collection of these critical data. It will identify institutional

barriers to data collection and make recommendations for overcoming them. Because hazardous materials accidents and releases are infrequent based on reporting under 49 CFR 171.16, methods for collecting incident rates, release probabilities, and flow data from all federal, state, and local sources and commercial operations should be explored. The data will then be available for extrapolating and evaluating the risk associated with hazardous materials transportation.

Successful implementation of the reporting system and associated data should support the identification and prioritization of risk reduction actions leading to fewer hazardous materials transportation incidents, releases, and health consequences.

1. Define project mission, scope, objectives, and deliverables.

2. Compile and assess current data availability and validity.

3. Interview stakeholders.

4. Develop draft recommendations.

5. Review draft recommendations with stakeholders and proposed process owners.

6. Refine recommendations and publish report.

1. Recommended definitions for incidents, accidents, releases, accident-related, non-accident-related, road type, pipeline age, track type, waterway type, container type, commodities covered, quantities covered, and so forth.

2. Assessment and compilation of currently available data.

3. Identification of specific data requirements.

4. Identification of stakeholders.

5. Recommendations for data collection and reporting process owners.

1. Recommendations for data collection frequency and processes for collection.

2. Final report.

3. Public presentation of recommendations.

• Shippers and associations

• Carriers and associations

• Terminals, warehouses, distributors, and associations

• Public, LEPCs, and associations

• State and federal departments including DOT, EPA, DOL, and DHS

• National Transportation Safety Board

• State and local governments

• Risk researchers and contractors

$500,000

24 months

Project 7

Detailed Information for Conducting Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Studies

Provide information for state and local agencies on methods and information systems that can be used to estimate hazardous materials commodity flows in their jurisdictions.

While DOT provides a handbook on commodity flow studies, many localities do not have access to reliable statistics on hazardous materials flows to use in these studies. Existing statistical information sources are too broad. They cover flows at the national, regional, and state levels. For local planners, this “macro” level is far too coarse—in both amount and types of materials moving through their jurisdictions—to make meaningful estimates of commodity flows to support decisions about requisite training and preparations for incidents.

1. Collect and review existing hazardous materials commodity flow data from local jurisdictions around the country and examine the methodologies employed.

2. Compare methods of estimating flows and identify best practices.

A detailed commodity flow survey methodology handbook that explains methods of obtaining information on commodity flows when the available data are too aggregate. The handbook will contain a resource guide to information resources, including large shippers, motor carriers, barge lines, and rail companies, that can provide local information. Information available on the Internet will be included.

• LEPCs

• Local emergency responders

• Shippers

• Carriers

$300,000

18 months

Project 8

National Hazardous Materials Emergency Response Capability Assessment

1. Determine the location and quality of response coverage for hazardous materials incidents.

2. Identify geographic locations where coverage is inadequate.

3. Develop cost-effective strategies for improving response to acceptable levels where deficiencies exist.

4. Create a more systematic and efficient approach for allocating government funding to response needs.

Various health, safety, and environmental regulations address emergency response planning and preparations for incident management in the event of a hazardous materials release. Although legislation such as the Super-fund Amendments and Reauthorization Act mandated that state and local agencies perform these tasks, few attempts have been made to identify response teams, assess their competency to respond to different types of hazardous materials emergencies, or determine how quickly a qualified unit can reach the site of an emergency within its jurisdiction and surrounding areas. As a result, a national profile of the ability of qualified response teams to reach the scene of an incident in a timely fashion is lacking. It is extremely difficult to allocate response resources effectively without knowledge of where improvement needs are greatest.

The project involves integrated use of (a) GIS technology, (b) survey data collected from individual hazardous materials teams and cleanup

contractors, (c) response analysis methodologies to evaluate the capabilities of individual units to handle releases of different hazardous material types, and (d) network algorithms to determine optimal routes and corresponding travel times for units to reach spill locations within their jurisdictions. The project results will serve as a benchmark study of the current status of emergency response coverage. It will also establish a method for monitoring changes in response capability over time as well as for directing future resource allocation.

1. Conduct literature review.

2. Develop and implement data collection plan.

3. Select GIS analysis platform.

4. Develop analysis methodology.

5. Perform analysis.

6. Evaluate results.

7. Develop recommendations.

8. Prepare and submit draft final report.

9. Revise and publish final report.

1. Synthesis report from literature review.

2. Survey form and list of criteria for evaluating response team capabilities.

3. Final report describing data collection and analysis methods, quality of response coverage, identification of coverage deficiencies, recommended improvement strategies, and use of the developed methodology as a tool for future response assessment and resource allocation.

4. Color-coded maps of the country showing geographical areas of response vulnerability for each hazard class.

5. Electronic format of the data for public use.

• Shippers

• Carriers (rail, truck, barge, pipeline, aviation)

• Federal, state, and local regulators/compliance officers

• Utilities

• Waste disposal sites

• Emergency response personnel

• LEPCs and other public interest groups

• Technical and public policy analysts

$500,000

24 months

Project 9

Transportation Emergency Response Guidelines for Hazardous Materials

Provide a consistent guideline document for use by emergency responders and handlers for managing transportation incidents involving hazardous materials. The document should (a) define the roles and responsibilities of carriers and shippers in the event of an incident and (b) provide procedures that are consistent across all modes, authoritative, and clear to all parties involved.

Publicly available emergency response guidelines do not cover all transportation modes, are often superficial in scope, and can be poorly documented. The contractor is tasked to prepare comprehensive guideline

documents that cover all types of incidents and all probable types of hazardous materials releases, arranged in a hierarchical manner. This document will cover at least the following:

1. Damage assessment of packaging to determine immediate remedial actions when warranted and subsequent actions as appropriate.

2. Immediate remedial actions, including type of damage control to employ, evacuations, and broadcasting emergency procedures. Protocols that do exist should be included and documented, along with emergency alert and warning systems (such as Emergency Alert Systems and Enhanced 911 Centers) and emergency uses that can be made of electronic bills of lading.

3. Field movement of lading as appropriate.

4. Definition of the roles and responsibilities of carriers, shippers, emergency responders, and other parties in an incident.

1. Perform a literature search to obtain past and present guidelines. The search should include guidelines used by industry and by government agencies, such as the Department of Defense.

2. Review and critique the existing guidelines.

3. Contact associations and institutions that conduct emergency response training.

4. Prepare and present the draft documents to the sponsor for comments and additional direction.

5. Revise and submit final deliverables.

1. Capability profile of first and final responders’ training requirements (qualifications).

2. Equipment requirements.

1. Remedial (immediate and appropriate) actions determination and implementation.

2. Command organization—definition of the roles and responsibilities of carriers and shippers within the context of the National Incident Management System aimed at standardizing incident management practices and procedures.

• Shippers

• Carriers (rail, truck, vessel, pipeline, aviation)

• Federal, state, and local regulators/compliance officers

• LEPCs and public interest groups

• Emergency response personnel, trainers, and trainees

$500,000 to $650,000

24 months