Impacts of Public Policy on the Freight Transportation System (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.

TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2011 www.TRB.org N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E F R E I G H T R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCFRP REPORT 6 (Revised) Subscriber Categories Aviation • Environment • Freight Transportation • Highways • Marine Transportation • Motor Carriers • Pipelines • Railroads • Safety and Human Factors • Terminals and Facilities • Vehicles and Equipment Impacts of Public Policy on the Freight Transportation System ICF INTERNATIONAL Fairfax, VA DELCAN CORPORATION Vienna, VA CHEVAL RESEARCH San Diego, CA Research sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM America’s freight transportation system makes critical contributions to the nation’s economy, security, and quality of life. The freight transportation system in the United States is a complex, decentralized, and dynamic network of private and public entities, involving all modes of transportation—trucking, rail, waterways, air, and pipelines. In recent years, the demand for freight transportation service has been increasing fueled by growth in international trade; however, bottlenecks or congestion points in the system are exposing the inadequacies of current infrastructure and operations to meet the growing demand for freight. Strategic operational and investment decisions by governments at all levels will be necessary to maintain freight system performance, and will in turn require sound technical guidance based on research. The National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) is a cooperative research program sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) under Grant No. DTOS59-06-G-00039 and administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). The program was authorized in 2005 with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). On September 6, 2006, a contract to begin work was executed between RITA and The National Academies. The NCFRP will carry out applied research on problems facing the freight industry that are not being adequately addressed by existing research programs. Program guidance is provided by an Oversight Committee comprised of a representative cross section of freight stakeholders appointed by the National Research Council of The National Academies. The NCFRP Oversight Committee meets annually to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Research problem statements recommending research needs for consideration by the Oversight Committee are solicited annually, but may be submitted to TRB at any time. Each selected project is assigned to a panel, appointed by TRB, which provides technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. Heavy emphasis is placed on including members representing the intended users of the research products. The NCFRP will produce a series of research reports and other products such as guidebooks for practitioners. Primary emphasis will be placed on disseminating NCFRP results to the intended end-users of the research: freight shippers and carriers, service providers, suppliers, and public officials. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCFRP REPORT 6 (Revised) Project NCFRP-02 ISSN 1947-5659 ISBN 978-0-309-21335-6 Library of Congress Control Number 2011932595 © 2011 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, RITA, or PHMSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not- for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org

CRP STAFF FOR NCFRP REPORT 6 (Revised) Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs William C. Rogers, Senior Program Officer Charlotte Thomas, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCFRP PROJECT 02 PANEL Freight Research Projects Allison L. C. de Cerreno, Port Authority of New York & New Jersey, New York, NY (Chair) Keith J. Bucklew, Indiana DOT, Indianapolis, IN Gloria J. Jeff, District of Columbia DOT, Washington, DC David L. Knight, Great Lakes Commission, Ann Arbor, MI Robert E. Martinez, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA James McCarville, Port of Pittsburgh Commission, Pittsburgh, PA Paul E. Nowicki, BNSF Railway, Chicago, IL M. J. Fiocco, RITA Liaison Joedy W. Cambridge, TRB Liaison C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S

NCFRP Report 6 (Revised): Impacts of Public Policy on the Freight Transportation System describes the numerous ways that government policy decisions can affect the freight system and, in turn, how understanding the differing concerns and priorities of governments is cru- cial to better consideration of the potential impacts of public policy. Using interviews with industry experts and an extensive review of documents, the research identifies current and recent policy issues with potential freight system impacts, evaluates the magnitude of the impacts, and assesses the extent to which the impacts were unexpected. Among the types of impacts identified were (1) changes in costs and revenues to freight carriers and shippers, (2) changes in freight volumes or shifts in mode, (3) changes in freight service quality, and (4) changes to freight system operations and safety. The research will promote a better under- standing at all levels of government of the complex relationships inherent in public policy and foster appreciation for how public policies affect the freight transportation system. The freight system is largely a private-sector enterprise, but public policy decisions have major impacts on its development and operations. To a large degree, the system is invisible to most Americans, and to most people, the phrase “transportation policy” is usually associated with passenger transportation. Even for most transportation officials, the freight transportation system receives little thought. Not only is the freight system little known or understood, there is even less understanding of the many links through which policy actions, whether related to transportation or not, can affect the movement of freight. Under NCFRP Project 2, ICF International was asked to examine a wide range of public policy decisions made since 1980, as well as some policies currently being debated but not yet enacted, in order to reveal the numerous ways that government policy decisions have affected (or could affect) the freight system. In addition to identifying freight system impacts, the report also assesses the extent to which such impacts were unexpected by the relevant decisionmakers. Lastly, the report considers the opportunity to improve public pol- icy decisions through access to better information about freight system impacts. Editor’s Note: NCFRP Report 6 (Revised): Impacts of Public Policy on the Freight Trans- portation System replaces NCFRP Report 6 of the same title, previously distributed. Revi- sions have been made to two sections of the report, as follows: • The section on “Truck Size and Weight Rules,” in Chapter 4 has been corrected and updated. • The second paragraph of “Operations and Maintenance Policy,” in Chapter 6 under Summary Discussion, has been revised. The assistance of C. Randal Mullett (Con-way, Inc.) and Dr. Michael Belzer (Wayne State University) in this work is acknowledged with thanks. F O R E W O R D By William C. Rogers Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

C O N T E N T S 1 Summary 8 Chapter 1 Introduction 8 Definition of Policy 8 Methodology 9 Report Organization 10 Chapter 2 Overview of the Freight Transportation System 10 What Is Freight Transportation? 10 The Freight Transportation Modes 16 The Role of Government 18 Chapter 3 What Public Policies Can Affect the Freight Transportation System? 18 Safety Policy 18 Security Policy 19 Land Use Policy 19 Environmental Policy 20 Energy and Climate Change Policy 20 Infrastructure Operations and Maintenance Policy 21 Infrastructure Investment Policy 21 Infrastructure Finance Policy 22 Trade Policy and Economic Regulation 24 Chapter 4 How Do Public Policies Affect the Freight Transportation System? 24 Introduction 24 HOS Rules for Truck Drivers 26 HOS Rules for Train Operators 27 Truck Speed Limits and Speed Governor Rules 28 Aircraft Fuel Tank Flammability Rules 29 Restrictions on Locomotive Horns 30 TWIC for Ports and Inland Towboats 32 Alien Fingerprint Rules for Outbound Planes and Ships 32 Federal Emission Standards for Diesel Engines 33 California In-Use Truck Emission Standards 34 Idling Restrictions for Trucks and Locomotives 35 Restrictions on Port Drayage Trucks 36 Restrictions on Disposal of Port Dredging Spoil 37 Water Pollutant Discharge Rules for Vessels 38 International Air Emissions Regulations for Vessels 39 State Truck Route Restrictions 40 Local Policies to Oppose a Railroad Acquisition

41 Truck Size and Weight Rules 43 Level of Investment in Highway Infrastructure 44 Level of Investment in Inland Waterway Infrastructure 45 Highway Tolls and Other User Charges 46 Lockage Fees for Inland Waterways 46 Peak Pricing for Port Trucks 47 Peak Pricing for Airports 49 Chapter 5 Case Studies 49 Case Study 1: Local Land Use Policies Affecting Port Facilities and Other Freight Terminals 54 Case Study 2: Local Truck Access and Parking Policies 58 Case Study 3: Air Cargo Screening Requirements 63 Case Study 4: State and Federal Climate Change Policies 72 Chapter 6 Conclusion 72 Availability of Information on Impacts of Policies 72 Decisionmaker Constituencies 73 Decision Context Framework 74 Summary Discussion 76 Conclusions 79 Appendix A Interviewees and Focus Group Participants 81 Appendix B Details on Impacts of Selected Policies 96 Appendix C Resources 102 Appendix D Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Initialisms Note: Some of the figures and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.