Guidebook for Conducting Local Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Studies (2011)

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.

24 After the HMCFS project team defines the data requirements, it identifies baseline informa- tion about hazmat transportation in the area, reviews and evaluates the information, and scopes the HMCFS project. A flow chart of the HMCFS process focusing on baseline information and HMCFS project scoping is shown in Figure 3-1. 3.1 Collect Baseline Information Collecting baseline information is the next step after HMCFS data requirements are defined. Baseline information includes what is immediately and locally known about the following: • How hazmat is transported in the study area, • Where hazmat is transported in the study area, and • The characteristics of hazmat transported in the study area. This includes the following, as available: • Previous emergency response or planning efforts such as a prior HMCFS that have been con- ducted to identify hazmat, industrial, or other commercial transportation activities in the area; • Modes and routes by which hazmat is transported in the area; • Locations of facilities that produce, store, use, or transport hazardous materials; population centers and future developments; and critical infrastructures; and • Information about transportation incidents and accidents in the area. It is important to note that the baseline information is focused on current “in-house” knowl- edge. It is a review for the local jurisdiction to assess its current state of knowledge about hazmat transport and identify associated information gaps. 3.1.1 Previous Emergency Response or Planning Documents Identifying previous, locally available documents about an area’s transportation patterns, haz- mat emergency response needs and guidelines, and similar types of information may be useful for an HMCFS, both as information sources and document templates. Identifying these docu- ments should be a first step in identifying baseline knowledge for an HMCFS. A prior HMCFS, if available, can be an especially important baseline data source. 3.1.2 Modes and Routes Modes by which hazardous materials are transported include roadway, railway, pipelines, waterways, and airways. C H A P T E R 3 Collect and Review Baseline Information and Scope Project

3.1.3 Facility, Population, and Critical Infrastructure Locations Fixed facilities that produce, store, or use hazardous materials can be identified by local in- dustry partners and from reported information about storage of hazardous substances (such as Tier II reports). Hazardous materials may be transported by different modes to these facilities. Population centers, critical infrastructure, and future developments may be affected by, or alter patterns of, hazmat transport associated with such facilities. 3.1.4 Incident and Accident Information Emergency managers and responders are likely to have experiential knowledge of previous in- cidents and accidents on hazmat transport routes. Even if accidents have not previously involved Collect and Review Baseline Information and Scope Project 25 Figure 3-1. The HMCFS baseline information and project scoping process.

hazmat transport, high-risk locations such as hairpin turns, steep curves, or blind intersections and entrances can increase the likelihood of incident occurrence. Including this experiential knowledge does not require a formal assessment and documentation—that may be covered as part of the new data collection (discussed in Section 4.2.3). However, discussing this informa- tion with local emergency managers and responders as part of the baseline knowledge assess- ment can help identify whether and where additional information is needed. 3.2 Review and Evaluate Baseline Information The project team reviews and evaluates the baseline information to identify a preliminary in- ventory of what is immediately and currently known about hazmat flow into, out of, within, and through the study area. The review will help the project team scope the HMCFS existing data collection, new data collection, and analysis. 26 Guidebook for Conducting Local Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Studies Classifying Transportation Modes and Routes • Roadways include, but are not limited to, Interstate highways, U.S. highways, state highways, urban arterials, and secondary roads such as county roads, farm roads, and forest roads. • Railways include Class I railroads that operate over large portions of North America, regional Class II railroads, shortline Class III railroads, and port, termi- nal, and industrial railroads. • Pipelines include petroleum crude pipelines, petroleum product pipelines, nat- ural gas transmission lines, natural gas collection and distribution lines, carbon dioxide lines, and other hazardous liquids lines. • Navigable waterways are those that can accommodate either shallow draft vessels such as barges and tow/push-boats, or deep draft vessels. Shallow draft channels, generally 15 feet deep or less, serve smaller ports as well as industrial facilities. Deep draft waterways serve larger ports as well as industrial facilities. • Airline terminals include intercontinental, international, national, and regional airports. Many airports have designated cargo facilities served by airlines that focus on cargo transportation. However, passenger airlines also offer cargo services. Things to Look for in the Baseline Information Review The preliminary inventory of hazmat flows allows planners to focus on routes as follows where: • There is reason to believe risks are high (e.g., high frequency or volume, high traffic counts, or recent accidents, especially those involving hazmat); • Knowledge is limited or undocumented (i.e., there is little or no empirical evidence); • Potential exposures are extreme (i.e., large populations, special needs popula- tions, or large congregations of people are frequently or routinely present); or • Some combination of these is present.

Ideally, previous documentation (such as a prior HMCFS) would be recent and specifically focused on hazmat transport over the corridors of concern. However, even an HMCFS that was not conducted recently can be useful for developing a baseline of existing knowledge. Routes or route segments can be classified by mode of transport, frequency and volume of hazardous materials, and extent of knowledge currently available. Hazmat transport is possible along any route, but the amount and frequency varies with mode and class. Collect and Review Baseline Information and Scope Project 27 Characteristics of Hazmat Transport by Types of Roadways • Large quantities of hazardous materials are frequently transported on the nation’s highways. The primary function of many highways is transporting through traffic. This often makes Interstates, freeways, highways, and other limited-access roadways the highest priority for study. Routes may be identi- fied as permitting or restricting hazmat transport. • Because primary or arterial roadways provide through movement with some access to adjacent land, they also typically receive high priority for study. To the extent that flows on limited access roadways are already understood, they may receive lower consideration. • Secondary or collector roadways provide access to the adjacent land and links to primary roadway and highway networks. Understanding these connections may be relevant to locations serving major industrial or transportation hubs in the area. • Local or tertiary streets are primarily for land access and likely represent the fixed facilities they directly serve. Railways transport very high quantities of commodities per unit, and although in many areas the transport of hazardous materials by railway may be less frequent than by roadways, it still may be significant. Hazardous materials are frequently transported throughout the Class I rail system. Regional railroads (Class II), because of the exchange of traffic with the Class I system, are considered very likely to handle hazardous materials with considerable volume and fre- quency. Many shortline railroads carry only a limited variety of commodities. For some short- lines, this will generally exclude hazardous materials, but hazardous material may make up almost all of the carload shipments for others. This generally holds for switching and terminal or port railroads as well, which are the smallest of the rail system types. Railways designated only for passenger railroads can be eliminated from consideration, except where they may intersect other hazmat corridors (e.g., a highway–rail grade crossing in an industrial area). Generally, pipelines are constructed to carry liquid commodities with consistently high vol- ume and frequency. Petroleum crude pipelines, petroleum product pipelines, natural gas trans- mission lines, and pipelines that carry other hazardous liquids (e.g., ammonia) often are of high interest for an HMCFS, given the nature of their hazards and the volume of hazardous material each carries. Waterways are especially well suited to transporting large quantities of commodi- ties. Airport terminals may be used for transport of hazmat cargo, although the volume of haz- mat air cargo transport is much lower than that of other modes, and airports are accessed by connecting roadways. Airport terminals may also receive aviation fuels by different modes. Major shipping routes into or out of fixed facilities that produce, store or use hazardous ma- terials within the study area are highly likely to exhibit significant volumes or frequency of haz- mat transport. Routes and facility locations may be classified in terms of the potential exposure

of nearby populations. Incident and accident information and previous analysis may identify areas of particular concern. Many jurisdictions feel that they have a good handle on hazmat traffic that originates in, is destined for, or transported entirely within their jurisdictions, but they lack a good understanding of hazardous material that is transported through their communities. Other jurisdictions, especially those that are larger and more com- plex, may require a detailed analysis of all types of hazmat transport. If risks are known to be low, knowledge is solid and well docu- mented, potential exposures limited, and there is no reason to be- lieve any of these have changed significantly over time, then the baseline level of knowledge may be sufficient. If, however, there are gaps in knowledge or information is not current or relevant, then additional HMCFS efforts may be required. In this case, baseline information assessments provide considerable insight for conducting the HMCFS and focusing it on high-priority issues or locations. 3.3 Scope the HMCFS Project The project team scopes the HMCFS project after reviewing the baseline information and identifying gaps in hazmat transport knowledge or information. An HMCFS can range from a simple, low-cost effort using existing data sources, to one that is much more complex, involving collection of new data and expenditure of a large amount of effort and resources. A review of Chapters 4, 5, and 6 is suggested before attempting to scope the HMCFS project. This will help the reader understand the kinds of information available from already existing data sources, in- formation that can be obtained from new data sources, and whether they are applicable to the HMCFS project’s objectives. Local jurisdictions should check with state (e.g., SERC) or federal entities about content requirements for an HMCFS and emergency plans to ensure that all re- quired information is obtained and documented. After identifying what needs to be done, the next step is to plan for the HMCFS—identify how and when it is going to be done, and who is going to do it. Funding is a key question for the proj- ect. Appendix D.5, Stretch Limited Time and Resources, discusses options for funding an HMCFS. Appendix D.6, Consider Consecutive-Year Studies, covers how an HMCFS can be scheduled over several years to address resource limitations. This may be particularly applicable to large jurisdictions with complex transportation systems. Keep in mind that grant funding for conducing HMCFS, such as the HMEP Grants Program, may have specific requirements that must be met to utilize funding. These requirements may result in significant impacts and limi- tations on the timing of HMCFS activities and deliverables. The question of who will participate in the HMCFS project is also important. Some LEPCs have availability and interest of their membership, but minimal funds for hiring an outside con- tractor. Since LEPCs and TERCs are made up almost exclusively of volunteers, Appendix D.7, Use Volunteers to Conduct HMCFS, presents issues particularly relevant to these entities. Oth- ers have funds available for hiring a contractor, but minimal availability of their members for participating in data collection or evaluation. Regardless of whether the HMCFS is conducted entirely internally, or if an external entity such as a contractor is brought in, an HMCFS requires the oversight of a manager or coordinator who can provide a central point for direction of the project, periodically review progress on the effort, provide input about direction of the project relative to objectives, and review project results. It is likely that this function will be made up of one or more members of the HMCFS project team. 28 Guidebook for Conducting Local Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Studies Understanding your information baseline helps guide the HMCFS project. The Lewis/Up- shur Counties LEPC in West Virginia reviewed a prior HMCFS as part of their baseline infor- mation assessment. It showed that local rail traffic was for coal transport. The LEPC deter- mined that little had changed with rail ship- ments since the previous study, so collection of new railroad data was not necessary.

Participation by local entities such as LEPCs in the commodity flow study is critical to the suc- cess of the study. The roles of the LEPC and its members change only slightly with the method chosen for conducting the HMCFS. Even if the LEPC chooses to hire an outside entity to conduct the study, the LEPC still has a vital role. In this case, the role(s) of the LEPC and its members may include the following: • Providing input to the contractor about the purpose and use of the study; • Providing input about known historical data and special local situations that may not be readily known; • Assisting the contractor in the acquisition of data. For example, in comparison to contractors, LEPCs are able to more readily access data from Tier II reports from fixed facilities and request information from transporters such as railroads; • Providing input on data collection site locations to ensure collected data covers the needs of the jurisdiction; and • Interpreting results of the HMCFS, disseminating information to stakeholders, and imple- menting changes to local emergency and community planning practices as a result of project objectives. An outside entity contracted to conduct an HMCFS also has defined roles. The roles of the contractor may include the following: • Conducting preliminary meetings with the LEPC to ensure that the study is designed to meet the identified needs, • Acquiring historical data and requesting assistance from the LEPC if necessary, • Designing a study to meet the needs of the LEPC, • Coordinating and conducting data collection, and analyzing data; and • Documenting HMCFS results. A local entity that conducts the study internally is also responsible for data collection and analysis. This will require, at a minimum, personnel who are experienced in the use of spread- sheet software such as Microsoft Excel®. Involvement of personnel with technical writing expe- rience will help ensure that the information is accurately and effectively communicated through HMCFS documents. Although not critical to the HMCFS, experience with Geographic Informa- tion Systems (GIS) will be very beneficial because GIS allows for hazmat transport information to be communicated using maps, in addition to lists, charts, and tables. Collect and Review Baseline Information and Scope Project 29