Identifying and Using Low-Cost and Quickly Implementable Ways to Address Freight-System Mobility Constraints (2010)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

51.1 Problem Statement Freight transportation has been and continues to be a major contributor to the U.S. economy. Estimates indicate that the volumes of freight are expected to double over the next two decades in the United States. A report (1) noted that the nation’s freight ton-miles by all freight modes increased steadily at an average rate of 1.2 percent per year between 1980 and 2004. The rapid growth in freight demand over the last 15 years has produced growing concerns regarding the capacity of the freight transportation system to support and sustain safe and efficient freight mobility. The increasing freight demand and capacity constraints present several challenges to the manage- ment and operation of the freight transportation system. The U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) estimates that volumes of goods shipped by trucks and railroads will increase over 2002 levels by 88 percent and 98 percent, respectively, by 2035 (2). During this time the ability to increase freight trans- portation capacity will be constrained by budgetary limita- tions, geographic barriers, population density, and urban land- use development patterns. The consequences of this increased freight demand and increased density include increased con- gestion, delay, air emissions, and operational costs, among others. Furthermore, evolving technologies, growing demand, changing business practices, shifting patterns of commerce, and government policies designed to address safety, security, environmental, and other public concerns may significantly affect transportation system performance. Freight mobility is constrained not only by physical infra- structure inadequacies but also by operational, regulatory, policy, technological, and financial limitations. Federal, state, and local transportation agencies’ ability to invest in system expansion and new system technology has been significantly constrained by inadequate revenue. The recent National Sur- face Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission (3) noted that the nation is investing only about 40 percent of the necessary levels to adequately sustain passenger and freight mobility. These factors have significantly increased interest in addressing freight mobility constraints through imple- mentation of innovative operational strategies, performance- improving regulatory and policy changes, and low-cost capital improvements. Recent studies and statistics document the inadequate capac- ity and increasingly costly congestion—not only on the nation’s highways but also in metropolitan areas, at water ports, rail- roads, airports, and intermodal facilities. For example, the trucking industry faces increasing levels of congestion each year, including that resulting from poorly managed interac- tions between truck and automobile traffic on Interstate high- ways and local arterials, including traffic associated with inter- modal terminals. As previously stated, the U.S. transportation network is operating at an unprecedented high level of traffic density. For example, the density of traffic on the highway system has more than doubled over the past 25 years with consequences that include increased congestion, delay, and air emissions. Over the same period, railroad network traffic density has nearly tripled (4). There is no single or simple solu- tion for the mobility challenges. The approach should focus on the entire surface and maritime transportation system rather than mode-specific solutions. A system-wide approach to trans- portation planning and funding would yield desirable results. Severe congestion increases the costs and frequency of needed road maintenance, which in turn takes a toll on throughput and vehicle operating costs and productivity during the high- way maintenance season. Many innovative, low-cost improvements are being imple- mented independently by public and private stakeholders [e.g., state DOTs, Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), shippers, freight carriers, port authorities, terminal operators, railroads, and other groups of stakeholders] to address freight mobility problems to meet their specific needs. Although many promising strategies have been developed and implemented, they have not been well documented or evaluated for their pos- sible applicability or scalability to other regions or localities. C H A P T E R 1 Introduction and Research Approach

Moreover, while public agencies have made substantial efforts to develop these strategies among different stakeholders and funding sources, implementation has been coordinated for the maximum benefits to be derived. Increasing the capacity of the existing freight transportation system through innovative operational and low-cost capital improvements and demon- strating these results will benefit both the public and private sectors, which are trying to keep the nation’s freight moving in support of the national economy. 1.2 Research Objectives The objectives of this project were to: 1. Develop a more standardized description of the dimensions of the freight system (e.g., elements of each mode and across modes, stakeholders, types of mobility constraints) that will help improve communication among freight-system decision makers and stakeholders. The goal is to facilitate examination of freight-system mobility constraints and the operational practices or system enhancements used to address these constraints. 2. Analyze explicitly the business practices and institutional factors that influence freight-system decision makers and stakeholders as they respond to freight-system mobility constraints, regulatory changes, and other public policy initiatives. 3. Develop a methodology that private- and public-sector decision makers can use to identify, categorize, and eval- uate quickly implementable, low-cost capital, operational, regulatory, and public policy actions focused on reducing system constraints. 4. Apply that methodology in a generic way to create a cata- log of actions that may be most useful in addressing the nation’s freight-system mobility constraints. 1.3 Research Approach 1.3.1 Overview The project was divided into 11 tasks and grouped into three main phases. The project activities and deliverables in each phase and how they relate to the project objectives are shown schematically in Figure 1. The first phase comprised the first five tasks. This phase established the baseline situation by defining the freight trans- portation system and designed a survey for collecting data nec- essary to develop a methodology for selecting low-cost imple- mentable physical and operational improvements to the freight transportation system. This phase addressed the first two objec- tives of the project by developing a standardized description of the dimensions of the freight system. The effort was to help improve communication among freight-system decision mak- ers and stakeholders and to facilitate examination of business practices and institutional factors, including regulatory and other public policy initiatives. The second phase of the project (Tasks 6-9) used the survey design developed in the first phase to gather data and infor- mation, develop and test the methodology, and structure an implementation plan. This phase focused on the third objec- tive of the project, namely to develop a methodology that private- and public-sector decision makers can use to iden- tify, categorize, and evaluate quickly implementable, low-cost capital, operational, and public policy actions that can address system constraints and enhance freight mobility. The final phase of the project (Tasks 10 and 11) focused on estimating the likely national value of actions or classes of actions addressing freight-system mobility constraints. This phase addressed the culminating objective of the project, i.e., to apply the methodology in a generic way to create a catalog of actions that may be most useful in addressing the nation’s freight-system mobility constraints. This phase presented the project findings in this document, which includes a user guide for the software tool (Appendix A). 1.3.2 Data Collection Three information-gathering approaches were used: (i) a lit- erature review, (ii) telephone interviews and limited in-person interviews with selected representatives of stakeholders, and (iii) a survey of a convenience sample of stakeholders. 1.3.2.1 Literature Reviews A comprehensive review of project reports and published technical literature and an Internet search were conducted. The purpose was to derive information on three key elements: (i) definition of freight mobility constraints, (ii) criteria for low-cost improvements directed at addressing freight mobility constraints, and (iii) sources of information on implemented projects. 1.3.2.2 Interviews The purpose of the interviews was to gather sufficient infor- mation to help develop a better understanding of constraints facing freight transportation by different modes and the range of improvements taken to address these constraints. These interviews also identified sources of detailed information on examples of implemented improvements by various agencies. The interviews preceded the survey and were designed to gather pertinent and detailed information that cannot be conveniently gathered through surveys, and to guide the development of a focused survey instrument. Such informa- tion includes decision factors in evaluating and selecting improvements, detailed project descriptions including cost, 6

and expected versus actual impacts of improvements. The results of the interviews and survey complement each other. Interviews were conducted with representatives of key stake- holders from both public agencies and private industry. These two groups of stakeholders represent public agencies (e.g., state DOTs, railroads) that provide and maintain the transporta- tion infrastructure and private industry (e.g., truckers, shippers, freight forwarders, and warehouse operators) that operate and, for the most part, pay for infrastructure maintenance and improvements. These users are directly impacted by the mobil- ity constraints and potentially will recognize the benefits of improvements taken to address these constraints. For the truck- ing industry, for example, targeted industry sectors included less-than-truckload (LTL), truckload (TL), and specialized car- riers as well as third-party logistics providers (3PLs). Respon- dents were chosen to represent carriers with regional or national operations. Similarly for the railroads, a sample of Class I, regional, and short-line railroads were interviewed. Freight carriers of various sectors and scopes of operations were chosen to illustrate how mobility constraints affect carriers with signif- icantly different operating characteristics. In addition, various labor unions in the freight industry were interviewed. 7 Figure 1. Relation between project tasks and objectives. Plan for assembling database of case studies Define “low-cost quickly implementable” options Literature review Conduct interviews and populate with case study data from public and private sectors Describe freight-system dimensions for all modes Design survey plan (sample, instrument, protocol) Interim report #1 Database structure, format, analytical framework Sources of literature List of interviewees Interim report #2 Database of case studies of strategies Dimensions of freight system Survey plan Develop a more standardized description of the dimensions of the freight system Analyze explicitly the business practices and institutional factors that influence freight- system decision makers and stakeholders Phase I: Tasks 1-5 Conduct survey of public and private sector stakeholders Analyze survey results Methodology concept Develop methodology Develop methodology implementation plan Develop methodology user guide Interim report #3 Survey results and analysis Methodology conceptual framework Interim report #4 Methodology implementation plan Methodology user guide Results of beta test Develop a methodology to identify, categorize, and evaluate quickly implementable, low-cost capital, operational, and public policy actions that can enhance freight mobility by addressing system constraints. Apply methodology to estimate national level actions Develop catalog of actions to address constraints Document findings Catalog of national level actions Final report Dimensions of freight system Methodology Implementation plan Methodology user guide Apply that methodology in a generic way to create a catalog of actions that may be most useful in addressing the nation’s freight-system mobility constraints. sk sat/s eiti vitc A selbare vile D se vitcejb Otc ej orP Phase II: Tasks 6-9 Phase III: Tasks 10-11

The respondents do not represent a statistical sample. How- ever, they do represent a cross section of the various seg- ments of the freight transportation industry and they provided remarkable insights and diverse information on the issues of interest to this project. The questions in the interview guide (Appendix C) were framed with the assumption that the data collection effort would capture information on case studies where low-cost improvements have been implemented or are currently in the process of being implemented. Respondents were provided interview questions prior to the interview. Responses to ques- tions in the interview guide were recorded to the highest level of detail possible. The respondents were asked to review inter- view notes for accuracy and completeness. Information was also gathered through a workshop con- ducted during the annual meeting of American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials’ (AASHTO) Subcommittee on Design (SCOD) held in Albuquerque, New Mexico, in July 2008 to engage SCOD members on the issue of low-cost improvements for freight mobility. The participants included representatives of state DOTs, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and an individual from the British Columbia Ministry of Transport, Canada. 1.3.2.3 Survey The purpose of the surveys was to gather information from public- and private-sector stakeholders regarding their percep- tions, attitudes, and practices to address freight-system mobil- ity constraints. The survey plan had three main components: (i) protocol – an Internet survey approach was used because of its relatively high response rate and ease of compiling and ana- lyzing survey data; (ii) survey instrument – the questions were specifically structured consistent with the protocol, i.e., Inter- net survey; and (iii) sampling plan – the approach to reach a representative sample of potential respondents. A dedicated website was created for this survey. This site was monitored continuously throughout the duration of the survey. The protocol was coded to prevent the same survey respon- dent from completing multiple surveys. The survey instrument (Appendix D) comprises a general section (all respondents are expected to answer) and mode-specific sections (directed pri- marily at private-sector stakeholders) as follows: • Motor carriers • Railroad companies • Deepwater ports and inland waterways • Labor unions, shippers, and warehouse operators. The format of the survey was designed to encourage private- sector stakeholders to complete the survey by directing them to questions that are directly related to their respective operations. Federal, state, and local transportation agencies were asked to complete the entire survey but to focus on the general section. The goal was to reach a fairly large sample of representa- tives of the various entities involved in freight transportation by working with industry associations and other organizations to help invite members to complete the survey. The target audience included public- and private-sector groups, i.e., state DOTs and MPOs; a cross section of national, regional, and local motor carriers; Class I, regional, and short-line railroads; port terminal operators; logistics service providers; shippers; freight forwarders; and labor unions. For example, the Amer- ican Transportation Research Institute (ATRI) invited motor carrier representatives through its website; the link was also sent to project advisers at Kansas City Smart Port to invite its members to take the survey. Invitations to take the survey were also sent directly to those listed in the national state DOT freight directory, MPOs, and AASHTO state rail con- tacts. The invitees were encouraged to forward the survey link to their colleagues to complete the survey. 1.3.3 Data Analysis Both qualitative and quantitative analyses were conducted on data collected through stakeholder interviews and surveys. The qualitative analysis involved preparing a summary of the data elements necessary to populate the database of low-cost improvement projects. This includes summary descriptions of constraints, performance indicators used in monitoring and identifying constraints, definitions of low-cost, quickly imple- mentable solutions, decision factors in selecting improvements, factors for evaluating improvement projects, lessons learned, and sources of further information. Standard statistical analysis principles and methods were used in analyzing quantitative data obtained from the survey. First, survey weights were used to adjust for any biases that may occur due to the sample selection and to expand the sam- ple results to the target population. Based on the estimated number of potential survey takers from each group of stake- holders and the number included in the email invitation, sam- ple weights were calculated and applied to adjust the results for non-response, and then post-stratified to adjust to the tar- get population. The product of these adjustments represents the final analysis weights that were applied to the samples of each category to ensure that the results from the sample are representative of the target population. Descriptive statistics such as weighted averages, frequencies, and percentages were used to characterize the survey responses. Separate analyses were conducted for each of the three primary modes (highway, rail, and water) while distinguishing between public- and private-sector perspectives to the extent possible. 8