National Academies Press: OpenBook

Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials (2011)

Chapter: Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data

« Previous: Appendix C - Disqualifying Offenses Table
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"Appendix D - Credential-Specific Survey Response Data." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14565.
×
Page 71

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.

64 A P P E N D I X D Credential-Specific Survey Response Data Date Week # Total Responses Air Highway/Tractor- Trailer Marine Rail Mode Unknown 28-Apr-10 1 8 1 4 0 0 3 5-May-10 2 46 4 25 25 11 5 12-May-10 3 53 7 30 29 14 5 19-May-10 4 63 10 39 34 16 5 26-May-10 5 69 10 43 34 18 5 2-Jun-10 6 156 13 128 38 26 7 9-Jun-10 7 293 20 261 41 30 9 16-Jun-10 8 346 20 313 42 30 10 23-Jun-10 9 362 21 329 43 31 10 30-Jun-10 10 378 21 345 43 31 10 Total 378 21 345 43 31 10 Table D-1. Data collection process progress summary. Less than 2 weeks 2 to 4 weeks 5 to 8 weeks 9 to 12 weeks 13 to 16 weeks Greater than 16 weeks Total CDL- HME 57 (21.0%) 109 (40.1%) 74 (27.2%) 20 (7.4%) 7 (2.6%) 5 (1.8%) 272 (100%) TWIC 12 (5.4%) 76 (33.9%) 81 (36.2%) 27 (12.1%) 12 (5.4%) 16 (7.1%) 224 (100%) FAST 2 (9.1%) 5 (22.7%) 6 (27.3%) 3 (13.6%) 2 (9.1%) 4 (18.2%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 5 (62.5%) 3 (37.5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) MMC 0 (0%) 1 (20.0%) 1 (20.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 1 (20%) 5 (100%) MMD 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 1 (25.0%) 4 (100%) MML 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 1 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) SIDA 3 (60.0%) 1 (20.0%) 1 (20.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) Other 25 (45.5%) 12 (21.8%) 11 (20.0%) 4 (7.3%) 0 (0%) 3 (5.5%) 55 (100%) Total 106 207 177 54 26 31 601 Percent 17.6% 34.4% 29.5% 9.0% 3.7% 5.2% 100% Note: Due to rounding, the totals may not add up to 100%. Table D-2. Respondents’ total time to obtain a credential, from beginning of application process through receipt of credential.

65 Way Too Short Too Short About Right Too Long Way Too Long Total CDL-HME 0 (0%) 4 (1.5%) 124 (46.1%) 103 (38.3%) 38 (14.1%) 269 (100%) TWIC 1 (0.4%) 0 (0%) 60 (26.8%) 101 (45.1%) 62 (27.7%) 224 (100%) FAST 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 6 (27.3%) 8 (36.4%) 8 (36.4%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 5 (62.5%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) MMC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60%) 0 (0%) 2 (40%) 5 (100%) MMD 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 2 (50.0%) 4 (100%) MML 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (50.0%) 1 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) SIDA 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) Other 0 (0%) 1 (1.8%) 33 (58.9%) 14 (25.0%) 8 (14.3%) 56 (100%) Total 1 5 238 234 121 599 Percent 0.2% 0.8% 39.7% 39.1% 20.2% 100% Note: Due to rounding, the totals may not add up to 100%. Table D-3. Respondents’ perception of the total time needed to obtain a credential, from beginning of application process through receipt of credential. Less than 2 hours 2 to 4 hours 5 to 8 hours 9 to 16 hours Greater than 16 hours Total CDL- HME 177 (66.3%) 71 (26.6%) 14 (5.2%) 2 (0.7%) 3 (1.1%) 267 (99.9%) TWIC 134 (61.2%) 71 (32.4%) 12 (5.5%) 2 (0.9%) 0 (0%) 219 (100%) FAST 13 (59.1%) 8 (36.4%) 1 (4.5%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 6 (85.7%) 1 (14.3%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 7 (100%) MMC 4 (80%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) MMD 2 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) MML 3 (75.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 0 (0%) 2 (100.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) SIDA 3 (60.0%) 1 (20.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20.0%) 5 (100%) Other 19 (52.8%) 9 (25.0%) 5 (13.9%) 0 (0%) 3 (8.3%) 36 (100%) Total 361 164 34 5 7 571 Percent 63.2% 28.7% 6.0% 0.9% 1.2% 100% Note: Due to rounding, the totals may not add up to 100%. Table D-4. Respondents’ time to complete the application process.

66 Way Too Short Too Short About Right Too Long Way Too Long Total CDL-HME 1 (0.4%) 2 (0.8%) 197 (74.1%) 54 (20.3%) 12 (4.5%) 266 (100%) TWIC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 132 (60.3%) 68 (31.1%) 19 (8.7%) 219 (100%) FAST 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 16 (72.7%) 4 (18.2%) 2 (9.1%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (37.5%) 5 (62.5%) 0 (0%) 8 (100%) MMC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 40 (80%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) MMD 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (25.0%) 4 (100%) MML 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (75.0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) SIDA 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) Other 0 (0%) 1 (1.9%) 40 (74.1%) 10 (18.5%) 3 (5.6%) 54 (100%) Total 1 3 441 143 37 589 Percent 0.2% 0.5% 74.9% 24.3% 6.3% 100% Note: Due to rounding, the totals may not add up to 100%. Table D-5. Respondents’ perception of the time to complete the application process. Less than 2 hours 2 to 4 hours 5 to 8 hours 9 to 16 hours Greater than 16 hours Total CDL- HME 220 (83.3%) 35 (13.3%) 7 (2.7%) 1 (0.4%) 1 (0.4%) 264 (100%) TWIC 158 (72.1%) 40 (18.3%) 16 (7.3%) 3 (1.4%) 2 (0.9%) 219 (100%) FAST 7 (31.8%) 6 (27.3%) 5 (22.7%) 2 (9.1%) 2 (9.1%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 6 (75%) 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 0 (0%) 1 (12.5%) 8 (100%) MMC 3 (60.0%) 1 (20%) 1 (20%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) MMD 2 (50.0%) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) MML 2 (50.0%) 1 (25.0%) 1 (25.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 1 (50.0%) 1 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (100%) SIDA 4 (80.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (20.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) Other 38 (70.4%) 7 (13.0%) 0 (0%) 1 (1.9%) 8 (14.8%) 54 (100%) Total 441 92 33 7 14 587 Percent 75.1% 15.7% 5.6% 1.2% 2.4% 1000% Note: Due to rounding, the totals may not add up to 100%. Table D-6. Respondents’ total travel time to obtain the credential once ready for pick up.

Way Too Short Too Short About Right Too Long Way Too Long Total CDL-HME 1 (0.4%) 1 (0.4%) 193 (73.1%) 56 (21.2%) 13 (4.9%) 264 (100%) TWIC 2 (0.9%) 0 (0%) 117 (53.2%) 77 (35.0%) 24 (10.9%) 220 (100%) FAST 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 8 (36.4%) 10 (45.5%) 4 (18.2%) 22 (100%) FUPAC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 4 (50%) 3 (37.5%) 1 (12.5%) 8 (100%) MMC 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 3 (60.0%) 1 (20.0%) 1 (20.0%) 5 (100%) MMD 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 4 (100%) MML 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 2 (50.0%) 2 (50.0%) 0 (0%) 4 (100%) SENTRI 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 1 (100%) SIDA 0 (0%) 1 (20.0%) 4 (80.0%) 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 5 (100%) Other 0 (0%) 0 (0%) 44 (81.5%) 8 (14.8%) 2 (3.7%) 54 (100%) Total 3 2 378 157 47 587 Percent 0.5% 0.3% 64.4% 26.7% 8.0% 100% Table D-7. Respondents’ perception of the total travel time necessary to obtain the credential once ready for pick up. Less than 2 weeks 2 to 4 weeks 5 to 8 weeks 9 to 12 weeks 13 to 16 weeks Greater than 16 weeks Total CDL-HME Too Long 6 45 38 10 4 0 103 Way Too Long 1 9 14 7 3 4 38 TWIC Too Long 1 32 50 12 3 3 101 Way Too Long 1 9 18 13 8 13 62 FAST Too Long 1 1 3 2 1 0 8 Way Too Long 0 0 2 1 1 5 9 FUPAC Too Long 3 2 0 0 0 0 5 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMC Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 MMD Too Long 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 MML Too Long 0 0 0 0 1 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 SENTRI Too Long 0 0 1 0 0 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 SIDA Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER Too Long 2 5 5 1 0 0 13 Way Too Long 0 0 3 2 0 2 7 Grand Totals Too Long 13 85 98 25 9 3 233 Way Too Long 2 18 37 23 14 27 121 Table D-8. Total time to obtain credential and perceptions. Cross-Tabulated Data 67

68 5 to 8 weeks, 42.06% 9 to 12 weeks, 10.73% 13 to 16 weeks, 3.86% Less than 2 weeks, 5.58% 2 to 3 Greater than 16 weeks, 1.29% 4 weeks, 6.48% Figure D-1. Percentage of respondents indicating that the total time to obtain the credential was too long. 9 to 1 19 13 to 16 weeks, 11.57% Greater than 16 weeks, 22.31% Less than 2 weeks, 1.65% 2 to 4 weeks, 14.88% 5 to 8 30.5 2 weeks, .01% weeks, 8% Figure D-2. Percentage of respondents indicating that the total time to obtain the credential was way too long.

Less than 2 hours 2 to 4 hours 5 to 8 hours 9 to 12 hours Greater than 16 hours Total CDL-HME Too Long 18 28 8 0 0 54 Way Too Long 2 4 3 1 2 12 TWIC Too Long 18 44 5 0 0 67 Way Too Long 4 9 5 1 0 19 FAST Too Long 0 3 1 0 0 4 Way Too Long 0 2 0 0 0 2 FUPAC Too Long 4 1 0 0 0 5 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMC Too Long 0 1 0 0 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 MMD Too Long 0 0 1 0 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 MML Too Long 0 0 0 1 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 SENTRI Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 SIDA Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER Too Long 2 3 3 0 0 8 Way Too Long 0 0 2 0 1 3 Grand Totals Too Long 42 80 18 1 0 141 Way Too Long 6 15 10 2 3 36 Table D-9. Time to complete credential application and perceptions. 2 to 4 hours, 56.74% 5 to 8 hours, 12.77% 9 to 12 hours, Less than 2 hours, 29.79% 0.71% Greater than 16 hours, 0.00% Figure D-3. Percentage of respondents indicating that the total time to complete credential application was too long. 69

70 Less than 2 hours 2 to 4 hours 5 to 8 hours 9 to 12 hours Greater than 16 hours Total CDL-HME Too Long 34 18 4 0 0 56 Way Too Long 2 8 1 1 1 13 TWIC Too Long 46 26 4 0 0 77 Way Too Long 6 7 9 0 1 23 FAST Too Long 3 2 2 2 1 10 Way Too Long 0 0 3 0 1 4 FUPAC Too Long 2 0 1 0 0 3 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 1 1 MMC Too Long 0 1 0 0 0 1 Way Too Long 0 0 1 0 0 1 MMD Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 1 1 0 0 2 MML Too Long 0 1 1 0 0 2 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 SENTRI Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 SIDA Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 0 0 OTHER Too Long 2 2 0 1 3 8 Way Too Long 0 0 0 0 2 2 Grand Totals Too Long 87 50 12 3 4 157 Way Too Long 8 16 15 1 6 46 Table D-10. Total time to pick up credential and perceptions. 5 to 8 hours, 27.78% 9 to 12 hours, 5.56% Greater than 16 hours, 8.33% Less than 2 hours, 16.67% 2 to 4 hours, 41.67% Figure D-4. Percentage of respondents indicating that the total time to complete credential application was way too long.

2 to 4 hours, 31.85% 5 to 8 hours, 7.64% 9 to 12 hours, 1.91% Less than 2 hours, 55.41% Greater than 16 hours, 2.55% Figure D-5. Percentage of respondents indicating that the travel time to pick up the credential application was too long. 5 to 8 hours, 31.91% 9 to 12 hours, 2.13% Greater than 16 hours, 12.77% Less than 2 hours, 17.02% 2 to 4 hours, 34.04% Figure D-6. Percentage of respondents indicating that the travel time to pick up the credential was way too long. 71

Next: Appendix E - CDL-HME and Threat Assessment Costs by State »
Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Hazardous Materials Cooperative Research Program (HMCRP) Report 6: Feasibility of a Consolidated Security Credential for Persons Who Transport Hazardous Materials discusses the feasibility of consolidating several existing security credentials, which are necessary under current regulations and policies, into one credential for all transportation modes.

The report evaluates the credentialing system to identify duplicative elements and redundant costs and describes the acquisition process, the application elements, and the physical characteristics for each identified credential. In addition, the report identifies the elements of the vetting processes for each credential. The report includes an examination of four options for consolidation, which provides insight into the basic elements of a universally recognized security credential for HazMat transportation workers.

HMCRP Report 6 also identifies key challenges for consolidation of security credentials, such as impetus and authority, organizational climate, financing, risk, and technological trending.

An alternative method of consolidating background checks is identified as a possible intermediate solution for removing duplicative processes and redundant costs.

A PowerPoint presentation, which summarizes the report process and conclusions, is available for download.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!