Impacts of Energy Developments on U.S. Roads and Bridges (2015)

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.

5 This chapter introduces background information and highlights the impacts from energy development on roads and bridges, including a description of types of energy development. The survey and interview processes and organization of the report are also described. BACKGROUND The energy sector (i.e., oil, natural gas, wind, biofuels, etc.) has been a major contributor to many state economies in the United States. These states’ infrastructures have played a critical role in meeting the transportation needs for sup- porting and further developing the nation’s energy reserves. The energy sector is placing significant financial and opera- tional demands on both state and local transportation sys- tems. Hundreds of millions of dollars are spent each year on road repairs that are attributed to energy development activi- ties. For example, the oil and natural gas industries require the movement of aggregate, equipment, and water to drill- ing sites, as well as flowback fluids from the well sites. As a result, rural roads and bridges that were designed to provide land access for residential and agricultural purposes are now subjected to heavy loads and increased traffic that are well beyond their design limits. Public agencies at the state, county, and municipal levels are challenged to address the increased damages resulting from energy-related traffic. Initial measures that have been taken to address this challenge have included requiring surety instruments, permits, and excess maintenance agreements from energy companies. Concerns about the impacts of these trucks on roadway infrastructure and has led to many local jurisdictions requiring bonds from energy companies. Simi- larly, rural roads have seen an increased number of oversized and overweight (OS/OW) trucks generated by the develop- ment of wind farms. The term oversized (OS) has to do with the height and width dimensions of trucks, and overweight (OW) relates to a maximum weight. Each state has its own definition of what constitutes an OW vehicle, but in many cases it is any truck weighing more than 80,000 pounds. In addition to experiencing the energy sector’s impacts on infrastructure durability, roadway networks are sustaining environmental impacts. Some roads are being strengthened to carry the increased applications of heavy loads, but at the same time, air and water quality in many areas have been negatively impacted, with issues such as such as dust control, erosion, and impacts to endangered species (Environmental Protection Agency 2009). Federal Perspective In 2012, the Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century Act (MAP-21) was signed into law to fund surface transpor- tation programs at more than $105 billion for federal fiscal years 2013 and 2014 (Public Law 112-141 2012). The MAP- 21 Act includes a number of provisions to (1) improve the condition and performance of the national freight network and (2) support investment in freight-related surface transporta- tion projects (Federal Highway Administration 2013). One of the factors listed in §167 Section D.1.B.vi for the designation of the primary freight network is the access to energy explora- tion, development, installation, or production areas. Another related item in the MAP-21 Act includes the establishment of critical rural freight corridors, in which a state may designate a road within its borders as a critical rural freight corridor if the road provides access to energy exploration, development, installation, or production areas. The legislation also requires the establishment of a national freight strategic plan that identifies freight planning routes providing access to energy areas, and directs the U.S.DOT to develop this plan within three years of MAP-21’s enactment, in consultation with states and other stakeholders, and to update the plan every five years. Section 1118 of MAP-21 requires a comprehensive long-range plan that describes improvements that may be required to reduce or impede the deterioration of roadways on which travel by heavy vehicles (including mining, agricultural, energy cargo or equipment, and timber vehicles) is projected to deteriorate the roadways’ condition substantially. Section 1120 deems projects that improve road- ways vital to national energy security are eligible as projects of national and regional significance, and cites eligible applicants for these projects to include a state DOT or a group of DOTs, a tribal government or consortium of tribal governments, a transit agency, or a multistate or multijurisdictional group of agencies. SYNTHESIS OBJECTIVE The objective of this synthesis is to document the impacts of the energy sector on roads and bridges and the state-of-the- practice strategies to minimize the impacts of heavy loads. chapter one INTRODUCTION

6 The report will help federal, state, and local transportation managers and agencies better understand and communicate the energy development impacts on roads and bridges, and select the appropriate strategies for managing them. Other aspects of the impacts of energy development on roadway infrastructure that are explored in this study include: • Areas of the country where road infrastructure damage from energy development are an issue for state and local transportation agencies; • Types of development associated with infrastructure damage; • Economic costs associated with supporting energy development companies with adequate and sustained infrastructure; • Current design standards (or amended standards, if any) used by states and local jurisdictions to address the increased frequency and weights of heavy truck traffic traveling these roads and bridges; • Engineering methods used by federal, state, or local agen- cies to assess and address the heavy truck loads and high traffic volumes created by energy development, including the metrics currently used to evaluate these impacts; • Tools being used by agencies to assess costs and pay for damages to roads and bridges related to energy development, such as taxes, fees, adequate public facil- ity ordinances, and other reimbursement or contractual mechanisms; • Agency practices that address the safety implications of increased vehicle volumes related to energy develop- ment, including speed, roadway geometry, and conflicts with local traffic; and • Examples of agency and industry collaboration to address roadway issues (i.e., sample agreements, state laws and regulations, etc.). Various efforts have been made in recent years by some states and local public agencies to address the impacts of energy development within those states. There is a need to quantify these efforts and garner examples of practices that are reported to be effective, to facilitate the exchange of information and to help other states. This study will provide DOTs and their local agencies with useful information and ideas for alterna- tive options to address more effectively the impacts of energy development on their roads and bridges. The synthesis also includes suggestions for future research, based on existing gaps identified through the literature review, survey, and agency interviews. This report provides a refer- ence to transportation agencies regarding existing engineering practices, funding approaches, and contractual mechanisms for dealing with the impacts of energy development. STUDY APPROACH A multifaceted approach was taken to document various efforts made in recent years by some states and local public agencies to address the impacts of energy development within those states. The approach to this study included a literature review, survey of state transportation agencies, and interviews with state and local transportation agencies, consultants, and uni- versities in states identified as having existing practices that are effective for dealing with energy impacts on public roads. The following sections provide more detail on each step in the approach. Literature Review A literature review was conducted to identify practices used by federal, state, tribal, and local agencies. In every state, manage- ment of the impacts of energy development activities involves a vast number of staff from municipal, state, and federal gov- ernment, consultants, universities, and state resource agencies. Because of the large number of people involved, the study panel opted for a more in-depth investigation of five individual state programs. This detailed focus on a small sample of states could obtain more explanation and details on various proce- dures. In-depth information was gathered from focus states Colorado, Iowa, North Dakota, Pennsylvania, and Texas. The criteria for selecting these five states are explained further in a subsequent section. A comprehensive literature review of U.S. sources estab- lished the background information on the range and impact on public roads and bridges from energy development projects. The consultants used a number of resources, including the Transport Research International Documentation, Internet and web searches, FHWA and DOT internal reports, journal publications, conference proceedings, other published media including newspaper and magazine articles, and resources of professional associations. Additionally, the review of programs online and interviews with key federal agencies—Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA), U.S. Forest Service (USDA-FS), FHWA Federal Lands, and Bureau of Land Management (BLM)—were conducted to determine their experience and research associated with energy development. Particular attention was paid to references sug- gested in the Project Scope and other related resources. Some of these resources were guidance manuals drafted by several federal agencies to address the design of infrastructure on rural roadways. Survey of State Transportation Agencies The survey consisted of 62 questions and was sent to mem- bers of the AASHTO Standing Committee on Highways, with a suggestion for distribution through the chief engi- neer’s office to the DOT local agency program coordinators to complete the survey. The survey was sent to contacts in each of the state DOTs, Washington, D.C., and Puerto Rico. Seventy-nine percent of the DOTs responded to this synthe- sis survey; the survey questions and results are included in Appendix A of this report.

7 Interviews of Transportation Practitioners in Focus States Based on the results of the survey and literature review, five states were selected for additional data gathering on practices used related to managing the impacts of energy development. A number of criteria were considered in selecting the five focus states to be interviewed. The criteria included: 1. The geographical distribution of states to reflect vary- ing climatic conditions and varying rural/urban road configurations; 2. Distribution of the types and extent of energy develop- ment industries to reflect the uniqueness of impacts on roads and bridges; 3. Inclusion of states in which roads and bridges owned and managed by local agencies are significantly impacted; 4. Inclusion of states in which significant impacts have been observed through the increase in maintenance and repair dollars and/or large percentage of increases in maintenance and repair budgets; 5. A range of safety data, such as an increase in the total number of truck-related crashes and the number of crashes that resulted in fatalities; and 6. Use of innovative solutions on roads and bridges for mitigating the impacts from energy development. DOT offices, local agencies, consultants, and universi- ties in the states of Colorado, Iowa, North Dakota, Penn- sylvania, and Texas were interviewed. As a result of some of the pertinent findings from the survey, additional inter- views were conducted with individuals in Mississippi and New Jersey. More than 41 representatives from several agencies or organizations involved at various levels with the locally administered federal aid process contributed to this synthesis effort. Additionally, multiple members of federal agencies and tribal nations were interviewed to gain their perspective on the topic, including the U.S. For- est Service, the Federal Lands Highway (FLH), the BLM, the BIA, the Tribal Technical Assistance Program, and the Southern Ute and MHA (Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara) Tribal Nations. Multiple representatives from the organizations shown in Table 1 were interviewed in person, over the phone, or by e-mail to gather their input on issues and practices in their state related to impacts of energy development on their roads and bridges. A list and sampling of documents obtained as examples of current practice are included in Appendix B (available at www.trb.org; search NCHRP Synthesis 469). ORGANIZATION OF REPORT This synthesis report is organized into five chapters. The bal- ance of chapter one presents the report’s structure and defines key terms. The report structure is summarized with brief expla- nations of each chapter’s content. This chapter also includes brief introductions to major types of energy development that use the nation’s highways. Chapter two describes energy development activities in the United States as documented in published literature and online state and local resources (e.g., county engineers associations, energy councils, etc.). There are sections on the strategies used by states for addressing engineering challenges, financ- ing repairs, and quantifying the extent of damages induced by heavy trucks affiliated with energy development. The chapter concludes with information from interviews and website review conducted with four federal agencies and two tribal nations that have experienced the impacts of energy development. Chapter three presents the impacts of energy industry devel- opment on state and local roads and bridges, as reported by the DOTs in their survey responses. The chapter describes the state of the practice in many states, on the extent to which the roadway system infrastructure design and maintenance, traf- fic operations, and safety are impacted. An overview of the various engineering practices, funding strategies, and cross- organizational tools reported by DOTs that are currently used to address energy development impacts on state and local roads and bridges is presented. Chapter four examines the specific practices of organiza- tions that were collected through published literature, survey responses, and a series of detailed interviews with individuals listed in Table 1 in each of the five states selected for further study. The chapter is organized to describe the road system impacts as well as the most effective practices for addressing engineering design challenges, assessing costs, using contrac- tual agreements, and mitigating impacts on safety. Organiza- tional efforts at the state and local levels for dealing with energy developers are also described. Chapter five concludes the synthesis with a summary of findings and suggestions for further study. The evaluation tech- niques for assigning the safety, infrastructure, and economic impacts of increased heavy vehicles owing to energy develop- ment activities are discussed, along with the current and evolv- ing state of the practice for effectively mitigating impacts of energy development on the roadway network. A number of sug- gestions for future research are also presented in this chapter. Each topic within a chapter follows a similar format: (1) the impacts of energy development on roads and bridges; (2) the practices used to address engineering challenges; (3) the tools to assess costs and contractual agreements; and (4) practices to mitigate for impacts on safety. These chapters are followed by a glossary, references, bibliography, and four appendices. Appendix A includes a copy of the survey questions and results. Appendix B (available at www.trb.org; search NCHRP Synthesis 469) presents several sample documents that were offered by agencies as a result of the interviews for sharing as examples. Appendix C includes links to resources identified

8 through the literature review or by the agencies interviewed. Appendix D includes a table that shows examples of practices in each topic area identified by the contacts in each of the five focus states. DEFINITIONS Some key terms are defined here that pertain to the synthesis scope. Additional terms are defined within the context of their relevant sections. A glossary is also included in the report that further defines acronyms and organizations discussed in the report. Equivalent Single Axle Loads (ESALs): The ESAL is a common measure to convert damage from wheel loads of various magnitudes and repetitions from mixed traf- fic into damage from an equivalent number of standard or equivalent loads. The most commonly used equiva- lent load in the United States is the 18,000-pound equiv- alent single axle load (normally designated as ESAL). The design ESAL is a cumulative traffic load sum- mary statistic. The statistic represents a mixed stream of traffic of different axle loads and axle configurations predicted over the design or analysis period and then converted into an equivalent number of 18,000-pound single axle loads summed over that period. Flowback fluids: Flowback is a water-based solution that flows back to the surface during and after the comple- tion of hydraulic fracturing. The fluid contains clays, chemical additives, dissolved metal ions, and total dis- solved solids. State, Federal, or Tribal Agency or Organization Departments or Role Colorado Local agencies County Engineering, PublicWorks Southern Ute Tribal Nation Planning State DOT Bridge Unit, Permits Office U.S. Forest Service Road Operations and Maintenance Iowa Local agencies County Engineering State DOT Bridges and Structures Office, Local Programs Office, Office of Design, Planning Office, Safety Office University transportation center Local Roads Safety Liaison Mississippi Local agencies County Engineering New Jersey State DOT Freight Management Office, Pavement Management and Technology University transportation center Transportation Institute North Dakota Local agencies County Engineering State DOT Deputy Director of Engineering Three Affiliated Tribes Consultant to tribal government University transportation center Transportation Institute Pennsylvania Consultant to energy developer Construction Management, Engineering Inspections Local agencies County Planning State DOT District Engineering, District Maintenance, District Pavement Management, District Posted and Bonded Roads Unit, Maintenance Programs, Municipal Services, Pavement Asset Management U.S. Forest Service Engineering and Oil, Gas, and Minerals Program Texas Local agencies County Engineering State DOT Bridge Division, District Maintenance, District Bridge Design University transportation center Pavement and Infrastructure Research Tribal Governments Tribal Technical Assistance Program, Southern Ute and MHA (Mandan, Hidatsa, Arikara) Tribal Nations Engineering Federal Highway Administration Federal Lands Highway Planning U.S. Department of the Interior Bureau of Land Management Planning and Engineering TABLE 1 AGENCY OR ORGANIZATION REPRESENTATIVES WHO CONTRIBUTED TO SYNTHESIS DEVELOPMENT

9 Horizontal and vertical drilling: Horizontal wellbores allow for far greater exposure to a formation than a conventional vertical wellbore. This is particularly useful in shale formations, which do not have suffi- cient permeability to produce economically with a ver- tical well. Such wells, when drilled onshore, are now usually hydraulically fractured in several stages. The type of wellbore completion used will affect how many times the formation is fractured, and at what locations along the horizontal section of the wellbore. Horizon- tal drilling is a process in which the well is turned hori- zontally at depth. It is normally used to extract energy from a source that runs horizontally, such as a layer of shale rock. Because the horizontal section of a well is at great depth, it must include a vertical part as well. Thus, a horizontal well resembles an exaggerated let- ter “J.” When examining the differences between ver- tical wells and horizontal wells, it is easy to see that a horizontal well is able to reach a much wider area of rock and the natural gas that is trapped within the rock. A drilling company using the horizontal technique can reach more energy with fewer wells. Hydraulic fracturing: Hydraulic fracturing is the fractur- ing of rock by a pressurized liquid. Some hydraulic fractures form naturally—certain veins or dikes are examples. Induced hydraulic fracturing (also hydro- fracturing, fracking, and fraccing) is a well-stimulation technique in which a high pressure fluid (usually water mixed with sand and chemicals) is injected into a well- bore to create small fractures (usually less than 1.0 mm wide) in the deep-rock formations to allow natural gas, petroleum, and brine to migrate to the well. When the hydraulic pressure is removed from the well, small grains of hydraulic fracturing proppants (either sand or aluminum oxide) hold open the small fractures once the deep rock achieves geologic equilibrium. Local public agency (LPA): Any organization that is directly or indirectly affiliated with a government body under federal, state, or local jurisdiction. Such entities have administrative and/or functional responsibili- ties including the authority to finance, build, operate, or maintain public infrastructure facilities. Although such entities are most often associated with county, municipal, town, township jurisdictions, etc., and their related public works authorities, the term LPA covers a broader context to include quasi-governmental entities such as port authorities, water districts, public utili- ties, and other agency representatives of governmen- tal entities associated with all levels of government, including tribal sovereignties. Shale gas formation: Shale gas is natural gas that is pres- ent in shale rocks. Shale rocks usually have low per- meability, making gas production more complex and costly. Shale gas is considered an “unconventional gas.” Although both conventional and unconventional deposits host natural gas, it is the more elaborate production methods that distinguish unconventional from conventional deposits; hydraulic fracturing is often applied to unconventional natural gas deposits. Like oil and coal, natural gas in shales has essentially formed from the remains of plants, animals, and micro- organisms that lived millions of years ago. Although there are different theories on the origins of fos- sil fuels, the most widely accepted is that they are formed when organic matter (such as the remains of a plant or animal) is buried, compressed and heated in the earth’s crust for a long time. In the case of natu- ral gas, this is referred to as thermogenic methane generation. Shale play: The term “play” in the oil and gas industry refers to a geographic area that has been targeted for exploration because of favorable geoseismic survey results, well logs, or production results from a new or “wildcat well” in the area. An area comes into play when it is generally recognized that there is an eco- nomic quantity of oil or gas to be found.