International Trade Corridor Plan
Michael W. Behrens, P.E., Executive Director
Texas Department of Transportation
December 1, 2006
Submitted in Compliance with SB 183 of the 79th Regular Session
Texas International Trade Corridor Plan Update
Juan Carlos Villa
Associate Research Scientist
Texas Transportation Institute
Christopher Rothe
Research Associate
Texas Transportation Institute
Manuel Solari
Assistant Transportation Researcher
Texas Transportation Institute
William R. Stockton, P.E.
Research Engineer and Associate Director
Texas Transportation Institute
December 2006
Prepared for
Texas Department of Transportation
By
TEXAS TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE
The Texas A&M University System
College Station, Texas 77843-3135
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
List of Figures ............................................................................................................................ iii
List of Tables.............................................................................................................................. iv
1. Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
2. Texas International Transportation Infrastructure .......................................................... 2
2.1 Texas Roads ..................................................................................................................2
2.2 Texas’ International Border Crossings .......................................................................4
2.3 Texas Railroads .............................................................................................................6
2.4 Texas Deep Draft Ports ................................................................................................8
2.5 Texas Pipelines..............................................................................................................9
2.6 Planned and Future Transportation Supply ..............................................................9
3. International Trade in Texas ........................................................................................... 13
3.1 Major Border Crossings ..............................................................................................18
3.2 Texas Seaports ............................................................................................................21
4. Texas International Trade Corridors .............................................................................. 22
4.1 Methods.........................................................................................................................22
4.2 Texas International Trade Corridor Ranking ...........................................................24
4.3 Major Texas Highways ...............................................................................................28
4.4 Effects of Changes in Trade Patterns ......................................................................29
5. Financing............................................................................................................................ 30
5.1 The Omnibus Transportation Bill (HB 3588) of 2003 .............................................31
5.2 Innovative Financing Tools ........................................................................................31
5.3 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy
for Users (SAFETEA-LU) ..........................................................................................33
5.4 Financing Texas International Trade Corridors ......................................................35
6. Implications and Recommendations.............................................................................. 35
6.1 Texas Corridors ...........................................................................................................35
6.2 Border Efficiencies ......................................................................................................36
6.3 Coordination with Mexico ...........................................................................................36
6.4 Border Trade Advisory Committee (BTAC) Recommendations ..........................37
7. Conclusion ......................................................................................................................... 38
Appendix .................................................................................................................................... 40
Border Trade Advisory Committee (BTAC) Principles, Strategies, Implementation
Actions and Measures ........................................................................................................... 48
ii
LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Major Texas Highways................................................................................... 3
Figure 2. Texas’ International Border Crossings ........................................................... 4
Figure 3. Texas Railroads ............................................................................................. 6
Figure 4. Texas Deep Draft Ports ................................................................................. 8
Figure 5. Proposed TTC-35 ........................................................................................ 10
Figure 6. Proposed I-69/TTC ...................................................................................... 11
Figure 7. 2005 U.S. International Trade ($ Billions) .................................................... 13
Figure 8. 2005 Texas International Trade ($ Billions) ................................................. 15
Figure 9. Major Texas International Trade Gateways (2004) ...................................... 17
Figure 10. North and South Truck Crossings by Texas Ports of Entry (2005) .............. 19
Figure 11. Texas International Trade by Trucks (2002) (Imports & Exports) ................ 25
Figure 12. Projected International Trade by Trucks (2020) (Imports & Exports) ........... 25
Figure 13. Texas International Trade by Rail (2002) (Imports & Exports) ..................... 27
Figure 14. Projected International Trade by Rail (2020) (Imports & Exports) ................ 27
Figure A1. Congressional High Priority Corridor Map.................................................... 47
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Texas Interstate Highway Mileage .................................................................. 2
Table 2. Bridge Crossings on Texas-Mexico Border ..................................................... 5
Table 3. Pipeline Export Values by Port of Entry (2005) ............................................... 9
Table 4. Proposed International Bridges for Texas ..................................................... 12
Table 5. U.S.-Mexico Imports and Exports .................................................................. 14
Table 6. Top 25 U.S. Freight Gateways, Ranked by Value of Shipments: 2004 ($
Billions).......................................................................................................... 16
Table 7. 2005 Texas-Mexico Trade by Value and Weight (Truck and Rail) ................ 18
Table 8. Top 10 U.S. Ports by Waterborne Tonnage, Imports and Exports (2004) ..... 21
Table 9. Foreign Trade (2004) .................................................................................... 22
Table 10. Texas International Trade Corridors by Truck Volume (Imports and
Exports) (Millions) ......................................................................................... 24
Table 11. Texas International Trade Corridors by Rail Volume (Imports and
Exports) (Millions) ......................................................................................... 26
Table A1. Top 20 Commodity Imports from Mexico to Texas (2005) ............................ 41
Table A2. Top 20 Commodity Exports from Texas to Mexico (2005) ............................ 42
Table A3. 2005 Texas-Mexico Trade by Port of Entry ................................................... 43
Table A4. Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) and FAF2 Commodity Lists and 19982020 Annual Growth Rates ........................................................................... 44
Table A5. Texas International Trade Corridor Volume by All Modes of
Transportation (Imports and Exports) ............................................................ 46
iv
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
1. INTRODUCTION
The International Trade Corridor Plan (ITCP) has been prepared to provide
recommendations to help improve trade movement between the United States and
Mexico in the state of Texas. Transportation Code, Section 201.6011 calls for a plan to
“include strategies and projects to aid the exchange of international trade using the
system of multiple transportation modes in this state; assign priorities based on the
amount of international trade, measured by weight and value, using the transportation
systems of this state.”1
The previous Texas International Trade Corridor Plan, dated November 2004,
discussed international trade between the United States and Mexico via roads,
railroads, ports, and pipelines in Texas. International multimodal trade corridors were
prioritized by value and weight, and trade forecasts were provided through the year
2030. The North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), trade policy, global trade
considerations, binational infrastructure planning, border operations, and transportation
security and technology were all cited as trends and considerations for future growth in
trade between the United States and Mexico. The previous report mentions that in
order to facilitate trade via the U.S.-Mexico border, policies to gradually open the border
will need to be implemented along with improved transportation security measures.
Also, the reduction of transportation costs and delays could revitalize the maquiladora
industry, thus increasing trade. Another recommendation was to streamline the risk
assessments of vehicles, operators, and cargo. Sharing demand-sensitive information
between users and border security agencies would allow more efficient use of existing
and future infrastructure.
The Texas Transportation Institute (TTI) has been selected by the Texas Department of
Transportation (TxDOT) to prepare an update to the ITCP. TTI gathered and analyzed
data from the Bureau of Transportation Statistics (BTS) to determine current
international trade trends between Mexico and the United States by commodity, import
value, and export value. The second version of the Freight Analysis Framework (FAF 2)
produced by the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is used to assign tons moved
through highway and rail corridors. Seaport data were gathered from both the U.S.
Department of Transportation Maritime Administration and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers to analyze foreign waterborne trade. With the collected data TTI prioritized
the transportation challenges of Texas and produced recommendations to aid
international trade. The recommendations include alternatives to improve border
crossings and transportation corridors, as well as financing and investment initiatives.
Specific goals and recommendations from the Border Trade Advisory Committee
(BTAC) are included.
1
Senate Bill No. 183, 79th Regular Session, 2005
1
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
2. TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE
Texas international trade relies on the network of transportation systems within the
state. Texas has vast networks of roads, border crossings, railroads, seaports, and
pipelines.
2.1 Texas Roads
Texas has an extensive road system with 79,645 centerline miles maintained by the
Texas Department of Transportation.2 It includes 16,256 state highway miles, 12,101
U.S. highway miles, and 3,233 miles of interstate highways (see Table 1 for interstate
highway details). Figure 1 shows the major highways in Texas and their connections
with major Mexico highways.
Table 1. Texas Interstate Highway Mileage
Interstate Highway
Certified Mileage 2005
I-10
879
I-20
636
I-35
407
I-45
285
I-30
224
I-40
177
I-37
143
I-27
124
Other Interstates
358
Total
3,233
Source: Texas Department of Transportation,
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/search/query.htm
2
Texas Department of Transportation, Pocket Facts 2006, ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdotinfo/pio/pfacts/pf_2006.pdf
2
3
Figure 1. Major Texas Highways
Source: Texas Transportation Institute
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
2.2 Texas’ International Border Crossings
The Rio Grande River separates Texas and Mexico and as a result, the
international border crossings for Texas and Mexico are bridges (Figure 2).
There are 14 commercial operating bridges along the Texas-Mexico Border.
Table 2 lists these bridges and the number of northbound truck crossings.
Figure 2. Texas’ International Border Crossings
Source: Texas Transportation Institute
As seen in Table 2, the World Trade Bridge has the most northbound truck
crossings with over one million crossings in 2005.
The Pharr-Reynosa
International Bridge on the Rise has the second most northbound crossings
followed by the Bridge of the Americas.
4
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table 2. Bridge Crossings on Texas-Mexico Border
City
Bridge
Veterans International
Bridge at Los
Tomates
Free Trade Bridge
Progreso
International Bridge
Pharr-Reynosa Int.
Bridge on the Rise
Rio Grande CityCamargo Bridge
Roma-Ciudad Miguel
Alemán Bridge
Lake Falcon Dam
Crossing
World Trade Bridge
Laredo-Colombia
Solidarity Bridge
Camino Real
International Bridge
Del Rio-Ciudad
Acuña International
Bridge
Presidio Bridge
Ysleta-Zaragoza
Bridge
Bridge of the
Americas
Total
U.S.
Mexico
Brownsville
Matamoros
Los Indios
Progreso
Lucio
Blanco
Nuevo
Progreso
2005
Northbound
Traffic
Truck
192,060
42,580
23,807
Pharr
Reynosa
483,889
Rio Grande
City
Camargo
46,308
Roma
Falcon
Heights
Laredo
Ciudad
Miguel
Alemán
Ciudad
Guerrero
Nuevo
Laredo
8,269
76
1,144,908
Laredo
Colombia
310,699
Eagle Pass
Piedras
Negras
97,729
Del Rio
Ciudad
Acuña
64,075
Presidio
Ojinaga
5,763
Ysleta
Zaragoza
347,212
El Paso
Ciudad
Juárez
393,442
3,160,817
Source: Texas Department of Transportation,
ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/iro/2006final.pdf
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
5
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
2.3 Texas Railroads
There are 44 freight railroads and 10,354 miles of operated rail lines in Texas.3
The major railroad companies (Class I) include BNSF, Kansas City Southern
Railway, and Union Pacific Railroad. The Texas-Mexican Railway, Class II, is a
key rail line for trade with Mexico. Figure 3 shows the Texas railroads and which
company operates the lines.
Figure 3. Texas Railroads
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2005
3
Texas Department of Transportation, http://www.dot.state.tx.us/tpp/
6
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
BNSF, formerly Burlington Northern Santa Fe Corporation, operates in Houston,
Dallas-Fort Worth, Galveston, Corpus Christi, Beaumont, El Paso, Lubbock, and
Amarillo.
Kansas City Southern Railway (KCS) serves Dallas-Fort Worth, Beaumont, and
the Texas Gulf Coast. On April 1, 2005, KCS completed the purchase of the
controlling interest in Transportación Ferroviaria Mexicana (TFM).4 Mexican
railroad Kansas City Southern de Mexico (KCSM) (formerly TFM) links Laredo
and Brownsville at the U.S.-Mexico border with central Mexico, the Gulf Coast at
Tampico and Veracruz, and the Pacific Coast at the Port of Lázaro Cardenas.
Union Pacific Railroad Company (UP) operates in Houston, San Antonio, Laredo,
El Paso, Eagle Pass, Brownsville, Corpus Christi, Beaumont, and Dallas-Fort
Worth. The rail network blankets the eastern one-third of Texas.5 Union Pacific
Railroad owns a 26% interest in the Mexican railroad Ferrocarril Mexicano, or
Ferromex, which operates the northwestern concession. Ferromex serves Eagle
Pass, Presidio, and El Paso on the Texas-Mexico border and provides direct
access from these border ports to the Guadalajara and Central Mexico regions,
as well as the ports of Altamira on the Gulf Coast and Manzanillo and
Topolobampo on the Pacific Coast.
Texas-Mexican Railway Company (TM) connects Laredo and Corpus Christi.
This rail line was bought by KCS and is now under common control with KCSM.
4
Kansas City Southern, http://www.kcsi.com
S. S. Roop, J. E. Warner, F. Zambrano, R. Ismailova, and D. Kang, The Impact of Mexican Rail
Privatization on the Texas Transportation System, Report 2128-2, Texas Transportation Institute, College
Station, Texas, 2001
5
7
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
2.4 Texas Deep Draft Ports
The main Texas deep draft ports are Orange, Beaumont, Port Arthur, Houston,
Galveston, Texas City, Freeport, Port Lavaca-Point Comfort, Corpus Christi, and
Brownsville. Figure 4 shows the geographical locations of these ports.
Orange
Beaumont
Port Arthur
Houston
Galveston
Texas City
Freeport
Port Lavaca-Point Comfort
Corpus Christi
Brownsville
Figure 4. Texas Deep Draft Ports
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2006
8
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
2.5 Texas Pipelines
While pipelines carry some international trade, they are part of a private industry.
Reliable data are not readily available for a complete analysis. Table 3 lists the
available value of commodities moved through Texas gateways via pipelines.
Table 3. Pipeline Export Values by Port of Entry (2005)
Port
Value (U.S. Dollars)
El Paso & Fabens
$ 368,944,053
Laredo
$ 114,415,787
Brownsville
$ 43,109,361
Eagle Pass
$ 15,315,737
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics
http://www.bts.gov/cgi-bin/tbsf/tbdr/exports_mex.pl
2.6 Planned and Future Transportation Supply
Perhaps the transportation project that could have the largest impact on
statewide mobility is the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC). The TTC is a proposed
50-year plan to improve transportation through Texas by building multimodal
transportation corridors. The conceptual plans include:
 three passenger lanes (each direction),
 two separate trucking lanes (each direction),
 passenger rails,
 freight rails,
 high speed passenger rails,
 high speed freight rails, and
 pipelines and utilities corridor.
The TTC will be built on a demand basis over time, prioritized by transportation
needs. Not all of the facilities on a corridor will be built concurrently.
There are two major corridors currently under review. The first is TTC-35
(Figure 5). I-69/TTC (Figure 6) is the other project currently under review. These
figures represent the areas currently being studied for the TTC routes. The
I-69/TTC will be part of a 1600-mile national corridor that will traverse the United
States from Mexico to Canada.
9
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Figure 5. Proposed TTC-35
10
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Figure 6. Proposed I-69/TTC
11
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
There are seven bridges proposed along the Texas-Mexico border. These
bridges would provide additional entry points to the United States with potential
commercial lanes. These bridges are included in Table 4.
Table 4. Proposed International Bridges for Texas
City
Bridge
U.S.
Mexico
Port of Brownsville Bridge
Brownsville
Matamoros
Donna International Bridge
Donna
Rio Bravo
Anzalduas International Bridge
Hidalgo
Reynosa
Mission International Bridge
Los
Ebanos
International
Bridge
Laredo V International Bridge
Mission
Los
Ebanos
Laredo
Reynosa
Gustavo Diaz
Ordaz
Nuevo Laredo
Guadalupe-Tornillo Int. Bridge
Fabens
Caseta
Source: Preliminary Assessment of Criteria to Guide the Establishment of
Low-Risk Ports of Entry on the Texas-Mexico Border, Prepared for the
Texas Department of Transportation by the Texas Transportation Institute,
February 2006
ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/iro/2006final.pdf
Other than the TTC, there are several rail projects in progress that could impact
international trade. First the Union Pacific Railroad Company is planning to
construct double track from Los Angeles to El Paso, which will significantly
increase railroad capacity into Texas. In addition, the South Orient Railroad,
which is owned by the State of Texas, links Mexico to the heart of Texas through
the use of the gateway at Presidio. Improvements to the track have recently
been made which will allow increased cross-border freight service.6 Also,
funding was recently secured for the West Rail Relocation project in
Cameron County that, once completed, will improve freight travel times between
Monterrey and Brownsville.
Pending the capitalization of the Texas Rail Relocation Fund by the legislature,
many other projects are in the works that could greatly improve the efficiency of
international trade, as soon as a funding source is identified. In many of
Texas metropolitan areas, rail traffic must move slowly due to at-grade highway
crossings. If track was relocated outside the city centers in these areas, the train
cargo could move through the state to its destination much more quickly.
6
Texas Department of Transportation, Texas Rail System Plan Summary,
http://www.dot.state.tx.us/TPP/trsplan/TRSPSummaryFinal.pdf
12
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
3. INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN TEXAS
In 2005 the United States exported $904.4 billion and imported $1.671 trillion in
trade7 (Figure 6). Texas accounted for 14 percent of both the exports and
imports for the United States in 2005.
U.S. International
Trade
U.S. Exports by States
Texas, $129
California, $117
Imports
$1,671
Exports
$904
Other
$428
New York, $50
Washington, $38
Michigan, $38
Florida, Ohio,
$33
$35
Illinois, $36
Figure 7. 2005 U.S. International Trade ($ Billions)
With a 1255-mile border with Mexico that includes 26 ports of entry and 16 water
ports along the Gulf of Mexico, Texas is a critical part of U.S. international trade.
In 2005 more than $135 billion in goods were imported from Mexico into the
United States through international border crossings (see Table 5). Another
$104 billion was exported to Mexico, with 42 percent coming from Texas alone.
Of the almost $240 billion traded between the United States and Mexico, Texas
accounted for $78 billion dollars, or one-third.
7
Office of Trade and Industry Information, http://tse.export.gov/
13
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table 5. U.S.-Mexico Imports and Exports
2005 Imports
from Mexico
State
Percent
of Total
Imports
2005 Exports to
Mexico
Percent
of Total
Exports
Texas
$ 34,026,509,444
25%
$ 43,916,060,953
42%
California
$ 25,799,083,303
19%
$ 15,676,897,790
15%
Michigan
$ 19,550,825,696
14%
$
4,084,286,984
4%
Illinois
$
5,438,981,273
4%
$
2,618,054,403
3%
Arizona
$
4,076,418,743
3%
$
4,369,876,488
4%
Ohio
$
3,669,730,640
3%
$
2,277,973,155
2%
Tennessee
$
3,550,970,509
3%
$
1,720,958,584
2%
North Carolina
$
3,181,038,537
2%
$
1,207,805,429
1%
New York
$
3,147,493,308
2%
$
1,488,402,737
1%
Indiana
$
2,939,560,068
2%
$
2,445,077,007
2%
All Other States
Total U.S. States
$ 30,019,846,701
$135,400,458,222
22%
100%
$ 24,471,117,749
$ 104,276,511,279
23%
100%
Note: Numbers may not total due to rounding.
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics, BTS Transborder Data,
http://www.bts.gov/cgi-bin/tbsf/tbdr/by_state.pl
Texas exported $128.7 and imported $235.5 billion in 2005 (Figure 7). Texas
trading partners include over 30 different countries. The top three export
destinations were Mexico, Canada, and China (mainland), which accounted for
54 percent of the Texas exports. The top three import origins were Mexico,
Venezuela, and China, accounting for 60 percent of Texas imports for 2005.8
8
Business and Industry Data Center, http://www.bidc.state.tx.us
14
International Trade Corridor Plan
Exports
Other
$50.9
December 2006
Exports Imports
$128.7
$235.5
Mexico
$50.1
Imports
Other
$78.4
Nigeria
$6.2
China
Canada
(Taiwan) Korea China
$14.7
(Mainland)
$3.5
$4.6
$4.9
Mexico
$116.3
Saudi China
Arabia $12.3
$9.4
Figure 8. 2005 Texas International Trade ($ Billions)
Venezuela
$12.9
Exports destined for Mexico were valued at $50 billion for 2005. For that same
year imports originating from Mexico were valued at $116 billion. Trade with
Mexico accounts for 39 percent of Texas exports and 49 percent of Texas
imports. The top commodities traded between Texas and Mexico are electrical
machinery and equipment, machinery and mechanical appliances, and vehicles.
For the top 20 commodities traded between Texas and Mexico in 2005, see
Tables A1 and A2 in the appendix.
Texas contains four of the top 25 U.S. freight gateways ranked by value of
shipments in 2004 for all modes of transportation (See Table 6). The four Texas
gateways are Laredo (sixth), Houston (ninth), El Paso (14th), and Dallas-Fort
Worth (17th).9 Texas is clearly important to the United States and foreign trade.
9
Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/freight_in_america/html/table_24.html
15
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table 6. Top 25 U.S. Freight Gateways, Ranked by Value of Shipments: 2004
($ Billions)
Total
U.S.
Trade Exports Imports
125.3
52.7
72.6
121.4
16.4
105.1
121.3
18.6
102.8
113.8
58.2
55.6
113.5
23.1
90.4
89.5
38.4
51.1
68.7
33.9
34.8
68.3
31.7
36.6
66.4
29.2
37.2
65.9
23.6
42.3
65.4
25.2
40.1
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
Port name
JFK International Airport, NY
Los Angeles, CA
Long Beach, CA
Detroit, MI
Port of New York and New Jersey
Laredo, TX
Los Angeles International Airport, CA
Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY
Houston, TX
Port Huron, MI
Chicago, IL
San Francisco International Airport,
12
CA
54.6
Charleston, SC
13
46.7
El Paso, TX
14
42.8
Norfolk, VA
15
33.5
Baltimore, MD
16
31.3
Dallas/Ft. Worth, TX
17
31.2
New Orleans, LA
18
30.0
Seattle, WA
19
29.6
Tacoma, WA
20
28.9
Oakland, CA
21
27.3
Savannah, GA
22
26.3
Anchorage, AK
23
26.3
Miami International Airport, FL
24
25.3
Atlanta,
GA
25
24.9
Total U.S. merchandise trade by all
modes
2,286.2
Top 25 gateways
1,478.3
Top 25 gateways as share of U.S. total (%)
64.7
24.3
15.4
18.3
12.0
6.9
14.6
15.2
6.7
5.3
8.5
9.7
5.7
16.2
10.4
30.3
31.3
24.4
21.5
24.4
16.6
14.8
22.9
23.6
18.8
16.6
20.5
9.1
14.6
816.5
520.1
1,469.7
958.2
63.7
2.4%
2.0%
1.9%
1.5%
1.4%
1.4%
1.3%
1.3%
1.3%
1.2%
1.2%
1.1%
1.1%
1.1%
65.2 64.7
Note: Numbers may not total due to rounding.
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/freight_in_america/html/table_24.html
16
Percent
of Total
U.S.
Trade
5.5%
5.3%
5.3%
5.0%
5.0%
3.9%
3.0%
3.0%
2.9%
2.9%
2.9%
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Texas contains nine of the top 50 international trade gateways in the United
States.10 Texas international trade is crucial to both the Texas and U.S.
economies. Figure 8 is a proportional illustration of the six largest Texas
gateways by value of shipments for 2004. Statistics for Corpus Christi,
Brownsville, and Texas City are listed in the figure.
Corpus
Christi
Brownsville
Texas City
Imports
(Billions)
10.0
Exports
(Billions)
2.0
5.1
8.3
5.5
1.3
Figure 9. Major Texas International Trade Gateways (2004)
10
Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/2005/html/table_01_47.html
17
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
3.1 Major Border Crossings
All Texas international surface trade with Mexico must cross the Texas-Mexico
border at one of the border crossings. The majority of Texas-Mexico surface
trade passes through 11 crossings. According to the Bureau of Transportation
Statistics these border crossings or ports of entry identify “the Customs port
where the entry documentation was filed with Customs and the duties paid. It
may not always reflect the port where the shipment physically crossed the border
into the United States. This is because, under current Customs regulations,
importers may file import documentation at one port while the shipment actually
enters at another port.”11 In terms of dollars of trade, Laredo is the highest value
port of entry with El Paso ranked second (Table 7).
Table 7. 2005 Texas-Mexico Trade by Value and Weight (Truck and Rail)
Texas-Mexico Trade Value, Imports
and Exports (Millions USD)
Texas-Mexico Trade Weight,
Imports Only (Tons)
Laredo
$ 93,453
Laredo
17,435,884
El Paso & Fabens
$ 42,567
El Paso & Fabens
5,146,430
Hidalgo & Progreso
$ 18,385
Hidalgo & Progreso
3,174,166
Brownsville
$ 11,341
Brownsville
1,745,515
Eagle Pass
$
7,672
Del Rio
$
3,038
Eagle Pass
1,707,346
Roma & Rio Grande
City
404,774
Presidio
$
390
Del Rio
283,102
Roma & Rio Grande City
$
312
Presidio
85,706
Total
$ 177,158
Total
29,982,923
Note: Numbers may not total due to rounding.
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/prod.html
http://www.bts.gov/cgi-bin/tbsf/tbdr/by_port_mex.pl
11
Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/data_field.html
18
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
For each of the ports of entry listed weight and value data was collected from the
Bureau of Transportation Statistics.12
El Paso and Fabens are located in the far western corner of Texas, bordering
both Mexico and New Mexico on I-10. Fabens is 32 miles southeast of El Paso.
El Paso is approximately 551 miles from San Antonio, 635 miles from Dallas, and
801 miles from Los Angeles. El Paso and Fabens are second only to Laredo in
terms of dollars of international trade. The majority of imports continue to the
western United States, Dallas, or Houston, Texas. More than $42 billion and
5 million tons were shipped through El Paso in 2005 (see Table A3 in the
appendix for details). In 2005, one million trucks (Figure 9) and 65,000 rail-boxes
crossed the border in El Paso.13 Both the Union Pacific Railroad Company and
the BNSF rail lines run through El Paso.
3,500,000
3,000,000
2,500,000
2,000,000
1,500,000
2,998,995
1,047,060
1,000,000
500,000
193,533
5,763
146,680
97,876
47,781
400,623
re
do
R
R om
io a
G &
ra
nd
H
e
Pr ida
og lg
re o &
so
B
ro
w
ns
vi
lle
gl
e
Ea
La
Pa
ss
io
R
el
D
id
io
*
Pr
es
E
Fa l Pa
be so
ns &
-
Figure 10. North and South Truck Crossings by Texas Ports of Entry (2005)
*
Note: Presidio northbound traffic only. No southbound traffic recorded.
Presidio lies 254 miles southeast of El Paso and 463 miles from San Antonio.
U.S. 67 passes through Presidio, which is part of the La Entrada al Pacifico
Corridor. The Texas Pacifico Transportation Limited rail line also crosses the
border at Presidio. In 2005 there were 5,763 truck crossings carrying over
80,000 tons of goods worth approximately $379 million. Presidio rail lines carried
$11 million of cargo through Presidio, mostly southbound (see Table A3 in the
appendix for more details).
Del Rio is 153 miles west of San Antonio on the Texas-Mexico Border. U.S. 90
and U.S. 277 intersect in Del Rio. The U.S. portion of the Ports to Plains corridor
12
Bureau of Transportation Statistics, BTS Transborder Data,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/prod.html
13
Texas Center for Border Economic and Enterprise Development,
http://texascenter.tamiu.edu/texcen_services/border_crossings.asp
19
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
starts in Del Rio and heads northward through San Angelo, Lubbock, and
Amarillo. The trade through Del Rio is mainly by truck. In 2005, $3 billion in
trade and 146,000 trucks crossed the border in Del Rio. Table A3 in the
appendix contains detailed information on trade weights and values for Del Rio.
Eagle Pass is located between Del Rio and Laredo on the border. It is 159 miles
from San Antonio. In 2005 over $7.5 billion of foreign trade passed through
Eagle Pass. In 2005, 193,000 trucks and 103,000 rail-boxes passed through
Eagle Pass. The Union Pacific Railroad Company runs through the gateway.
U.S. 277 and U.S. 57 intersect in Eagle Pass. Detailed data for Eagle Pass are
found in Table A3 of the appendix.
Laredo is 156 miles southwest of San Antonio along I-35. Laredo also has a
close proximity to Brownsville (204 miles) and the Port of Corpus Christi (149
miles), and it is only 337 miles from Houston. U.S. 59, U.S. 83, and I-35 all
converge in Laredo. Most of the trade coming through Laredo is transported
along I-35, through San Antonio, Austin, and Dallas, all the way to Chicago,
Detroit, and Ohio. Much of the remaining trade is transported to Houston and
along I-10 eastward. Rail lines also run parallel to I-35, and the Kansas City
Southern de Mexico, Texas-Mexican Railway and Union Pacific Railroad lines
run through Laredo.
In 2005 three million trucks crossed the Texas-Mexico border through Laredo.
Those trucks carried over 11 million tons through Laredo valued at over $66
billion. The rail lines transported another 6 million tons valued at over $26 billion
(Table A3 of the appendix). The top commodities transported through Laredo
were motorized vehicles, cereal grains, and nonmetal mineral products.
Roma and Rio Grande City are only separated by 13 miles of U.S. 83. Rio
Grande City is 261 miles from San Antonio. U.S. 83 is the only major highway
passing through Roma and Rio Grande City. There is not a major rail line that
connects to the cities. In 2005, $312 million in trade and 97,876 trucks passed
through these two cities. The trade details for Roma and Rio Grande City are in
Table A3 of the appendix.
Hidalgo and Progreso are 20 miles apart and just over 250 miles San Antonio.
U.S. 281 transects both cities, and connects with U.S. 83 near Hidalgo. No
major rail lines run through either city. In 2005, 48,000 trucks crossed through
Progreso. Similar data were not available for Hidalgo. Over $18 billion in goods
was transported across these two cities in 2005 (Table A3).
Brownsville is located near the southern tip of Texas, bordering both Mexico
and the Gulf of Mexico. It is 277 miles from San Antonio and 354 miles from
Houston. Brownsville is only 164 miles south of Corpus Christi. U.S. 77 provides
most of the access to Brownsville. A total of 400,000 trucks and 46,000 railboxes entered or left Texas via Brownsville. Through Brownsville commodities
20
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
valued over $10 billion by truck and $925 million by rail were traded. See Table
A3 of the appendix for detailed information. The Union Pacific Railroad and the
Kansas City Southern de Mexico rail lines pass through Brownsville.
3.2 Texas Seaports
Besides the gateways along the Texas-Mexico border, there are Texas seaports.
Four of the top 10 U.S. ports, measured by weight, are in Texas (Table 8). They
include the Houston, Beaumont, Corpus Christi, and Texas City ports.
Table 8. Top 10 U.S. Ports by Waterborne Tonnage, Imports and Exports
(2004)
Port
Foreign Tonnage
Houston, TX
137,536,511
South Louisiana, LA
104,770,803
New York, NY & NJ
82,199,554
Beaumont, TX
70,874,216
Long Beach, CA
62,515,408
Corpus Christi, TX
53,795,057
Texas City, TX
50,805,786
Los Angeles, CA
43,871,852
New Orleans, LA
40,422,710
Baltimore, MD
32,780,446
Source: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers,
http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/portton04.htm
In 2004, Houston was the top ranked port in the United States by import and
export tonnage.14 In 2004 the Port of Houston traded $66.4 billion with foreign
partners with $37.2 billion being imports (Table 9). Houston’s 2004 tonnage was
137.5 million tons. The most common imports are petroleum and petroleum
products, iron and steel, crude fertilizers and minerals, organic chemicals, wood
and articles of wood. The top exports include petroleum and petroleum products,
organic chemicals, cereals and cereal products, plastics, and animal or vegetable
fats and oils.15
The Port Beaumont’s foreign trade value is second in Texas, trading $16.1 billion
in 2004. In that same year 70.9 million tons of foreign trade was shipped via
Beaumont.
14
15
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/portton04.htm
Texas Ports Association, http://www.texasports.org (used for all seaport commodity information)
21
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
The Port of Corpus Christi traded $12 billion and 53.8 million tons internationally
in 2004.
Similarly, the Port of Texas City traded $9.6 billion and 50.8 million tons
internationally in 2004.
Table 9. Foreign Trade (2004)
Value (Billions USD)
Seaport
Exports Imports Total
Houston
29.2
37.2
66.4
Beaumont
1.3
14.8
16.1
Corpus Christi
2.0
10.0
12.0
Texas City
1.3
8.3
9.6
Weight
(Millions
Tons)
137.5
70.9
53.8
50.8
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/publications/national_transportation_statistics/html/table_01_47.html
http://www.iwr.usace.army.mil/ndc/wcsc/portname04.htm
4. TEXAS INTERNATIONAL TRADE CORRIDORS
To define the Texas international trade corridors, the same corridors are used in
this update as in the previous International Trade Corridor Plan (ITCP) published
in November 2004 as per the TxDOT guidelines. Trade flow information for all of
the corridors identified in the previous ITCP was not available.16
4.1 Methods
The Federal Highway Administration’s first edition Freight Analysis Framework
(FAF) and FHWA’s second edition Freight Analysis Framework (FAF 2) are used
to determine trade flows. The FAF2 databases for foreign trade and waterborne
trade are used in combination as the data source. The FAF 2 databases include
commodity, mode, origin, port, destination, tonnage, and value. To identify import
flows, all data that had a foreign origin and passed through a Texas port of entry
were used. For exports, all data that passed through a Texas port of entry and
had a foreign destination were used. To assign the values from the databases to
individual corridors, the FAF state freight flows for ports and other international
gateways were used to determine the most likely routes from the ports of entry to
the final destination or conversely, the routes most likely taken from the origin to
the ports of entry.
16
Trade flow information was not available in the FAF 2 databases for the I-45 Galveston & Houston,
US 277 Del Rio & I-10, US 67 Presidio & I-10, US 288 Freeport & I-45, US 59 Laredo & I-37, and US 57
Eagle Pass & San Antonio corridors.
22
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Base year commodity flows are calculated using FAF. This database contains
1998 commodity flow data and two forecasts, 2010 and 2020. An annual growth
rate is used for each commodity group. Table A4 of the appendix shows the
commodity list with the 1998-2020 annual growth rates.
The application of this methodology produced the following results for
international trade in Texas.
23
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
4.2 Texas International Trade Corridor Ranking
Table 10 lists the Texas international trade corridors by volume moved through
each corridor by truck (2002) as well as projections for 2020. Ton-miles17 for
2002 and projections for 2020 are also shown. Figures 10 and 11 show truck
shipments by weight for the years 2002 and 2020 respectively. Table A5 of the
appendix shows the volumes and value of goods shipped for all modes of
transportation for 2002 and volume projections for 2020.
Table 10. Texas International Trade Corridors by Truck Volume
(Imports and Exports) (Millions)
Corridor
I-35 Laredo & San Antonio
I-35 San Antonio & Dallas
I-10 Houston & Louisiana border
I-30 Dallas & Arkansas
I-10 San Antonio & Houston
I-10 El Paso & San Antonio
I-45 Houston & Dallas
US 59 Houston & Arkansas border
US 75 Dallas & Oklahoma border
US 59 US 77 & Houston
US 77 I-37 & Victoria
US 77 Brownsville & I-37
I-35 Dallas & Oklahoma border
US 281 Texas Valley & I-37
I-37 Corpus Christi & San Antonio
I-20 El Paso & Dallas to Louisiana
I-40 Amarillo & TX Panhandle
US 287 Dallas & Amarillo
Ports to Plains I-27/US 87/I-10,
Amarillo & North
US 69 Beaumont & US 75
US 83 Laredo & Texas Valley
Tons
21.97
15.50
9.71
9.15
7.00
5.79
3.52
3.36
3.23
2.82
2.80
2.80
1.98
1.70
1.68
1.60
1.06
0.90
2002
Ton-Miles
3,428
4,247
1,068
1,783
1,379
3,184
842
995
262
360
241
422
158
277
246
1,019
195
180
Tons
38.35
27.01
16.36
15.83
11.77
10.12
5.94
5.71
5.70
4.83
4.80
4.80
3.48
2.97
2.94
2.73
1.89
1.49
2020
Ton-Miles
5,983
7,402
1,799
3,086
2,319
5,564
1,420
1,689
462
618
412
724
278
484
429
1,742
349
298
0.52
0.40
0.02
196
74
4
0.97
0.67
0.03
366
124
6
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2006
17
Ton-miles (one ton of freight shipped one mile) is the primary physical measure of freight transportation
output. For example, 40 tons moved 100 miles is equivalent to 4,000 ton-miles.
24
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Figure 11. Texas International Trade by Trucks (2002) (Imports & Exports)
Figure 12. Projected International Trade by Trucks (2020) (Imports & Exports)
25
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table 11 shows international trade moved through the corridors by rail. Similar
to Table 10, the weight and ton-miles for 2002 and projections for weight and tonmiles for 2020 are shown. Figures 12 and 13 show rail shipments by weight for
the years 2002 and 2020 respectively.
Table 11. Texas International Trade Corridors by Rail Volume
(Imports and Exports) (Millions)
Corridor
I-35 Laredo & San Antonio
I-35 San Antonio & Dallas
I-30 Dallas & Arkansas
I-35 Dallas & Oklahoma border
I-10 Houston & Louisiana border
US 75 Dallas & Oklahoma border
I-10 San Antonio & Houston
US 59 Houston & Arkansas border
I-45 Houston & Dallas
I-40 Amarillo & TX Panhandle
I-10 El Paso & San Antonio
US 281 Texas Valley & I-37
I-37 Corpus Christi & San Antonio
US 59 US 77 & Houston
US 77 I-37 & Victoria
US 77 Brownsville & I-37
Tons
14.02
11.65
6.08
3.18
3.07
2.24
2.02
1.98
1.72
0.98
0.96
0.94
0.94
0.55
0.55
0.55
2002
Ton-Miles
2,187
3,191
1,185
254
338
182
398
587
412
181
529
154
137
71
47
83
Ports to Plains I-27/US 87/I-10,
Amarillo & North
I-20 El Paso & Dallas to Louisiana
US 69 Beaumont & US 75
US 287 Dallas & Amarillo
US 83 Laredo & Texas Valley
0.28
0.27
0.23
0.18
0.00
107
171
43
36
1
Tons
25.18
21.30
10.70
6.29
5.18
4.13
3.37
3.09
3.32
1.85
1.61
1.84
1.84
0.91
0.91
0.91
2020
Ton-Miles
3,929
5,835
2,086
503
570
334
665
915
794
343
887
301
268
117
78
137
0.49
0.47
0.39
0.29
0.01
184
298
71
58
1
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2006
26
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Figure 13. Texas International Trade by Rail (2002) (Imports & Exports)
Figure 14. Projected International Trade by Rail (2020) (Imports & Exports)
27
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
4.3 Major Texas Highways
Interstate Highway 35 (I-35)
I-35 has the first, second, and 13th ranked corridor-segments in Texas when
measured by weight of international trade moved by trucks (Table 10). Similarly
I-35 corridor-segments rank first, second, and fourth when measured by tons of
international trade shipped by rail (Table 11). More international trade moves
through I-35 via both rail and truck than any other corridor in Texas. I-35
contains the top two corridors for Texas international trade by value transported
by all modes (See Table A5 in the appendix).
I-35 links Laredo, the largest Texas port of entry to San Antonio, Austin, Dallas,
and north to Canada. The Union Pacific Railroad runs parallel to the Texas
portion of I-35. Trade flows between Laredo and Dallas are expected to grow
77 percent between 2002 and 2020 for all modes. With this corridor’s heavy use
and expectation of continued growth, congestion can be expected to worsen if
steps are not taken to address the transportation need.
Interstate Highway 10 (I-10)
I-10 has the third, fifth, and sixth ranked corridor-segments for trucks and the
fifth, seventh, and 11th ranked corridor-segments for rail by volume of
international trade transported. I-10 connects El Paso, San Antonio, Houston,
and Beaumont. Of the total 73.6 million tons shipped by all modes for the
Houston-Louisiana border corridor (Table A5 in the appendix), 51.4 million tons
were shipped by pipelines. The remaining corridor-segments of I-10 have trucks
carrying more weight and dollars of goods than any other mode. Ton-miles for
trucks for I-10 corridor-segments rank third, fifth, and sixth. Some shipments
travel from Laredo along I-35 to San Antonio and then proceed to I-10 and travel
east or west depending on their destinations.
Interstate Highway (I-45)
I-45 connects the Port of Galveston to Houston and continues to Dallas. Much of
the freight flows in this corridor are moved via pipelines that run parallel to I-45
from Houston to Dallas. The I-45 corridor ranks seventh in trucking volume and
ninth in rail movement of Texas international trade. The Port of Houston
provides the majority of trade that is shipped via I-45. Pipelines move the most
tons while trucks carry slightly more in terms of value of goods shipped in this
corridor. The I-45 corridor is expected to grow 37 percent from 2002 to 2020
which is much slower than the Texas average for international trade corridors of
64 percent.
Other Corridors
The remaining corridors account for 20 percent of the weight and 29 percent of
the value of international goods shipped through Texas by all modes. New
28
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
industrial developments or major infrastructure changes such as the I-69/TTC,
might affect future international trade movements through these corridors.
Therefore, it is important to monitor these corridors and international trade flows
in Texas.
4.4 Effects of Changes in Trade Patterns
Over the past decade trade between the United States and Asia, especially
China, has grown at unprecedented rates. The container traffic at the ports of
Los Angeles and Long Beach grew 280 percent from 1990 to 2005. During that
same time the container traffic at the Port of Seattle grew by 78 percent. This
increased trade has caused congestion at the U.S. West Coast seaports. The
congestion is due to a number of factors including continuing growth, ports not
improving productivity quickly enough, and railroads failing to add sufficient track
and equipment to accommodate the additional trade.18
Because of the congestion at the West Coast ports, some retailers are shifting to
all-water service by traveling through the Suez or Panama Canals. The Suez
Canal is advantageous for shippers from South China who are shipping to the
eastern coast of the United States. This is especially true of shippers using the
larger post-Panamax ships, which are too large to pass through the Panama
Canal. By using the larger post-Panamax ships, companies can take advantage
of economies of scale to offset the longer route as compared to the Panama
Canal. One problem with these larger ships is that only two East Coast ports,
Norfolk, Virginia and Halifax, Nova Scotia are currently prepared to receive postPanamax ships with a draft of 49 feet. The Panama Canal is considered a
shorter and cheaper route between the United States and China. However, the
Panama Canal is approaching its capacity limit. The canal is expected to reach
its capacity between 2009 and 2011. Voters of Panama earlier this year
approved $6 billion in funding for the expansion of the Panama Canal.
Construction will begin March 2007 and is scheduled for completion in 2014.
The Port of Houston is already making preparations for the expansion of the
Panama Canal. In anticipation of an influx of trade moving through the expanded
Panama Canal, Houston is planning the new Bayport container terminal.
According to the executive director of the Port of Houston, “This expansion will
put Houston in a position to compete with the East Coast ports for [postPanamax] vessels.”19
Another alternative to shipping via the Suez and Panama Canals is shipping
either to ports north of the Los Angeles and Long Beach ports or to ports in
Mexico. Shippers are increasingly using the Oakland, California and Seattle,
Washington ports. Investments are also being made into ports further north than
Seattle, such as the Prince Rupert Port, British Columbia, which has access to
18
Harrington, Lisa H., Breaking Point: Ports Perform Under Pressure, Inbound Logistics, June 2006
Leach, Peter T., Panama Canal Officials: We’re Still Competitive, http://www.gulfshipper.com, July 24,
2006
19
29
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
an underused railroad that runs to the Midwest United States.20 The Mexican
port of Lazaro Cardenas is another alternative port for shipments from Asia.
Wal-Mart and Hutchison Whampoa may invest $300 million to develop the port
and increase its capacity. The cargo could then be moved by trucks or via the
Kansas City Southern de Mexico railroad to the United States.21
The growth of trade with Asia combined with the congestion of West Coast ports
means that Asia-U.S. trade will likely be funneled into other alternatives. This
includes developing and using the port of Lazaro Cardenas, which would
increase cross-border traffic in Laredo. The majority of this cargo will likely pass
through Texas on its way to the East Coast. With the expansion of the Panama
Canal, the Port of Houston could also receive a large influx of additional trade
headed toward the Southeast United States. Additional traffic from the Suez
Canal entering the Port of Houston will likely be carrying containers with a final
destination in or near Texas. Not only will the Port of Houston and the Laredo
port of entry be affected by the additional trade, but the railroads and highways
that will carry the goods to their final destination may need to be expanded to
avoid congestion similar to the West Coast ports. However, “caution is advised
for planners relying on continued congestion at the ports of Los Angeles and
Long Beach to justify port investments given that in 2005 Southern California
ports have managed to grow at around 8 percent without any congestion at the
sea side of the operations.”22
5. FINANCING
According to TxDOT, the vehicle miles traveled increased 41 percent from 1990
to 2000. During that same period, lane miles increased merely 3 percent. 23 One
reason transportation infrastructure in Texas has not been able to expand as
quickly as transportation demand is financing. In the past financing has been an
obstacle to building adequate infrastructure in a timely manner. However, the
Omnibus Transportation Bill (HB 3588) has permitted the use of alternative
financing options. The innovative financing methods have provided additional
ways to fund construction of transportation infrastructure and expedite the
completion of transportation projects. In addition, additional federal funds have
become available for the construction of corridors with national economic
impacts. HB 3588 has opened the doors to alternative and innovative financing
in Texas.
20
Machalaba, Daniel, Tiny British Columbia Port Aims To Be New Venue for China Trade, The Wall Street
Journal, August 8, 2006
21
Lozano, Leticia, Mexico-US Trade Rising, http://www.gulfshipper.com, May 1, 2006
22
Robert Harrison, Nathan Hutson, Randy Ressor, Jim Blaze, “Planning for Container Growth Along the
Houston Ship Channel and Other Texas Seaports: An Analysis of Corridor Improvement Initiatives for
Intermodal Cargo”, Center for Transportation Research, November 2005
23
Poole, Robert W., Jr., “Texas Sets the Pace in Highway Finance”, Public Works Financing, March 15,
2004, http://www.reason.org
30
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
5.1 The Omnibus Transportation Bill (HB 3588) of 2003
In 2003, HB 3588 gave the Texas Turnpike Authority Division of TxDOT and
regional mobility authorities (RMAs) the ability to issue revenue bonds backed by
tolls and to enter into comprehensive development agreements with private
entities. The public-private partnerships (PPPs) allow private sector companies
to design, construct, and operate toll road facilities.24 The PPPs shift some risk
from the state to the private sector, provide guarantees on costs, facilitate faster
project deliveries, and promote better life-cycle costing.
The HB 3588 gave the RMAs and Texas Turnpike Authority Division new powers
in toll revenue bonding, land acquisition, and enforcement of toll payments by
motorists. The law has given the power to take currently non-tolled highways
and include them in toll projects. This may be done to help maintain existing
roads or allow other roads to be built as non-tolled. HB 3588 has also made
managed lanes possible. Managed lanes include lanes dedicated to commercial
trucks. This could potentially allow larger freight trucks, which have been illegal
on federal highways, to carry international trade using the dedicated lanes. HB
3588 also permits the tolling of the managed lanes including high occupancy toll
(HOT) lanes.
In 2005, follow-up legislation to HB 3588 was passed. This legislation, HB 2702
requires a public vote on the conversion of tax-funded non-tolled highways in
Texas into toll roads. It also requires private operators of state-owned toll roads
to get approval from TxDOT on how they will set toll rates. It became effective
September 1, 2005.
5.2 Innovative Financing Tools
Some of the new financing alternatives that are available include loans, bonds,
partnerships, tolling, and other pricing techniques, as described below.
Comprehensive Development Agreement (CDA)
CDAs are agreements with a private entity that, at a minimum, provide for the
private entity to design and construct a turnpike project and may also provide for
the financing, acquisition, maintenance, or operation of a turnpike project. CDA
projects may include both tolled and non-tolled elements, projects in which the
private entity has an ownership interest in the project, and projects that are
financed wholly or partly with private activity bonds. The goal is to minimize
public tax-based funding, maximize private investment, encourage innovation
and efficiency, accelerate project delivery, and share project risks.
Orski, Ken, “Texas – Expediting Road Construction with Toll Financing”, Innovation Briefs, January 12,
2004, http://www.innovativefinance.org
24
31
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Proposition 14 (HJR 28)
Proposition 14 was a constitutional amendment from September 13, 2003. It
provides for the authorization of the issuing of notes or the borrowing of money
on a short-term basis by a state transportation agency for transportation-related
projects, and the issuance of bonds and other public securities secured by the
state highway fund. The terms of the bond notes or loans are not to exceed two
years.25
Public-Private Partnerships (PPP)
The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) website defines PPPs as
“contractual agreements formed between a public agency and private sector
entity that allow for greater private sector participation in the delivery of
transportation projects.”26 By allowing the private sector to participate in an
expanded and more comprehensive manner, the public benefits by quicker
product delivery, project cost savings, improved quality and technologies, and
private funding and resources.
State Infrastructure Bank (SIB)
According to the Federal Highway Administration’s website, “A SIB is a revolving
fund mechanism for financing a wide variety of highway and transit projects
through loans and credit enhancement. SIBs are designed to complement
traditional Federal-aid highway and transit grants by providing States increased
flexibility for financing infrastructure investments.”27
TIFIA Loans
The Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act of 1998 (TIFIA) is a
federal loan program for transportation projects. TIFIA can enhance debt ratings
making bond issuances more attractive to investors. An example in Texas is the
Central Texas Turnpike Project. With the TIFIA loans the potential concerns
about uncertain toll revenues were offset. Forty miles of the toll road opened in
the fall of 2006, one year ahead of schedule and more than $400 million under
budget. With the $916.8 million TIFIA credit, the state can retire $900 million in
low interest Bond Anticipation Notes (BANs) that begin maturing in 2007.28
Tolling
Tolling, or user charges, can be an effective way to complete transportation
projects faster than the traditional pay-as-you-go financing, such as gasoline
25
Texas Secretary of State Roger Williams,
http://www.sos.state.tx.us/elections/voter/2003sepconsamend.shtml
26
Federal Highway Administration, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/ppp/defined.htm#1
27
Federal Highway Administration,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/innovativefinance/sibreview/introduction.htm
28
United States Department of Transportation, http://tifia.fhwa.dot.gov
32
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
taxes. Tolling allows the users to pay for the infrastructure over time. The
infrastructure can be built before all funds are raised by promising the revenue
collected via tolls to the private sector through leasing or by backing bonds with
the future revenues collected. In return for the promised revenues or bond
interest, the private sector funds the transportation projects.
Tolling can be especially useful where state and federal funding are inadequate
to produce sufficient funding to meet the demand for new or improved
infrastructure.
Value Pricing
Value pricing or congestion pricing is different from the typical toll pricing. Value
pricing rates vary with the level of congestion on the tolled roadway. The rates
are the highest during the busiest time periods and lower during off-peak periods.
This graduated system deters some users from using the roadway during the
peak periods, thus reducing congestion. On the other hand, the lower tolls
during off-peak periods may provide an incentive for drivers to use the toll road
when the roadways may be underused, thereby increasing revenues.
Value pricing can be a useful tool in other areas as well. Border crossings can
use value pricing to shift some traffic from the busiest times to off-peak periods.
This could help reduce wait times caused by congestion of commercial vehicles
at Texas border crossings.
5.3 Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A
Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU)
The SAFETEA-LU is the transportation act signed by President George W. Bush
on August 10, 2005. The Act guarantees $286 billion for funding of highways,
highway safety, and public transportation. The funds will be available for a fiveyear period, 2005 to 2009.
Coordinated Border Infrastructure Program (CBIP)
CBIP funds totaling $145 million were set aside for use by states bordering
Canada and Mexico for qualified transportation projects for fiscal year 2006. This
amount increases annually until 2009 when $210 million will be available. Texas
received $33 million in fiscal year 2006 with increased funding to $51 million by
fiscal year 2009. Funding from this program is intended to facilitate and expedite
cross-border motor vehicle and cargo movements.
Border crossing
infrastructure, highway and safety enforcement facilities, electronic data
exchange, and international coordination of transportation planning qualify for
this program. The funds may be used in Mexico within 100 miles of the U.S.
border; however Texas has limited it to projects within 50 miles of border
crossings. The projects in Mexico must directly and predominately facilitate
cross-border vehicle and cargo movement at an international port of entry. The
33
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
projects must be constructed to match U.S. standards and be properly
maintained for the useful life of the facility.29
The available funds can be used to improve infrastructure near border crossings.
This can be especially valuable on Mexico’s side to ensure through corridors and
efficient border crossings. This can help utilize existing technologies on the U.S.
border and decrease wait times. Also, international coordination with Mexico can
be financed using these funds.
National Corridor Infrastructure Improvement Program
Funds totaling $1.948 billion have been set aside over the five years from 2005
through 2009 for projects in corridors of national significance. There are 33
projects under this program. The I-69 corridor is one of the 33 projects. It affects
Texas, Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi, Tennessee, Kentucky, and Indiana. A
total of $50 million has been budgeted to assist in the planning, design, and
construction of the I-69 corridor. The I-69/TTC qualifies as part of the I-69
corridor and could use the funding to help develop the I-69/TTC.
High Priority Projects Program
This program identified the Congressional High Priority Corridors (Figure A1 in
the appendix). A total of $14.832 billion (5,091 projects) have been earmarked
for these priority corridors in the United States. The Texas corridors that have
been identified as Congressional High Priority Corridors are as follows:









an East-West Transamerica Corridor that crosses the northern panhandle
of Texas;
the I-69 or I-69/TTC Corridor;
U.S. 59 from Laredo through Houston to the Texarkana area (I-69);
I-35 (from Laredo north along I-35, similar to the TTC-35);
Ports to Plains, from Laredo north via I-27 to Denver, Colorado;
the SPIRIT Corridor on US 54 from El Paso through New Mexico, Texas,
Oklahoma, to Wichita, Kansas (where it connects with I-69);
from Dallas along I-30 to Little Rock, Arkansas, where it connects to I-69;
La Entrada al Pacifico Corridor, which connects Presidio to the Ports to
Plains corridor; and
Camino Real Corridor from El Paso, Texas to Denver, Colorado.
All of these corridors are eligible for funding from this program and are important
to international trade in Texas.30
29
30
Federal Highway Administration, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/planning/cbipfacts.htm
Federal Highway Administration, http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/nhs/hipricorridors/hpcor.html
34
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
5.4 Financing Texas International Trade Corridors
With the growing demand for transportation infrastructure, Texas faces a serious
challenge.
However, with Federal-aid programs available and innovative
financing tools, the problem is not insurmountable. Federal funds are available
and should be used to coordinate with Mexico and even improve their bordercrossing infrastructures.
This investment will have a positive effect on
international trade in Texas. Tolling and PPPs may need to be utilized more
frequently in future transportation projects. This will allow for projects to be built
much sooner than with traditional revenue sources and will incorporate the
expertise and capital of the private sector. Other tools such as value pricing may
help reduce congestion during peak periods on both roadways and border
crossings. More detailed studies may be required to determine the best
combination and use of the available financing tools for future Texas
transportation projects.
6. IMPLICATIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
International trade is affected by numerous factors including international trade
policies, consumer preferences, traffic and port of entry congestion, economic
environments, technology, and even war. A few of the most relevant factors
affecting Texas’ international trade are addressed here. Although it is helpful to
address these topics individually, it is important to remember many issues affect
trade simultaneously.
6.1 Texas Corridors
I-35 is already congested in areas surrounding Austin, Dallas, and San Antonio.
This congestion coupled with the high expected growth in international traffic
suggests that this busiest highway is a priority for Texas international trade. The
proposed TTC-35 is a possible solution to the congestion and future growth
along I-35. This multimodal expansion will allow international trade traffic that is
not destined for the metropolitan areas within Texas to bypass the most
congested parts of I-35. The improved railroads could also assist in reducing the
number of trucks that pass through I-35 for long haul shipments while the highspeed rails could reduce the amount of passenger traffic.
Much of the trade coming into Houston, Brownsville, and Laredo is eventually
destined for the Midwest and East Coast. I-10 and I-30 currently carry much of
this trade traffic. They rank only behind I-35 in weight of international trade
moved by trucks. The proposed I-69/TTC would alleviate much of the congestion
on I-10 and I-30. The proposed I-69/TTC route would connect Laredo,
Brownsville, and Houston to the Midwest and East Coast. The corridor would
have a similar affect on trade and congestion as the TTC-35. With Houston
being the only major city in Texas along the I-69/TTC there is less need to exit
the corridor to make deliveries inside of Texas. This makes the corridor a more
effective alternative route.
35
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
6.2 Border Efficiencies
A current impediment to international trade between Texas and Mexico is
inefficient border crossings. Currently there are long delays for commercial
trucks trying to cross into the United States. The consolidation of various
procedures could promote efficiencies and reduce delays.
Specifically,
eliminating the duplication of vehicle safety inspections, combining security
facilities, implementing interoperable technology, modifying hours of operation,
increasing staffing levels, and applying demand management techniques like offpeak incentives – value pricing, could effectively reduce delays.
New procedures and technologies significantly impact the way international
border crossing inspections are carried out, and therefore the infrastructure
needs at international border crossings. Planned international border crossings
should be designed with enough flexibility to benefit from the latest technology,
as well as any new technologies that become available, and expedite the design
and construction processes.
The Presidential Permit policy should be reviewed to facilitate international bridge
construction. Current Presidential Permit procedures to construct or modify
international bridges are lengthy and difficult to obtain. A streamlined procedure
will support the process of obtaining a timely permit for any required modification
to take advantage of new technologies or processes.
6.3 Coordination with Mexico
Efficient ports of entry and adequate transportation infrastructure in Texas are
necessary but not sufficient to improve international trade. If there are long
delays or inefficiencies on the Mexican side of the border, the efficiencies gained
in Texas are lessened. Coordination with Mexico is needed to ensure the
planning and developing of through trade corridors. Formal and informal
coordination efforts with Mexican federal and state government agencies are
important to ensure the development of efficient U.S.-Mexico trade corridors.
Existing international border crossing procedures and infrastructure should be
examined on a continuing basis to identify efficiencies that can be gained by
coordinating with Mexican stakeholders. Future international border crossing
plans should be developed in close coordination with Mexican and U.S.
stakeholders to promote the efficient use of the latest technologies, procedures,
and infrastructure on both sides of the border.
Constant changes in U.S. security and safety policies impact the border crossing
process and the overall trade between Texas and Mexico. It is important to
support cooperation efforts with Mexican government agencies and the trade
community so that new rules are understood and their impact on international
trade is minimized.
36
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
6.4 Border Trade Advisory Committee (BTAC) Recommendations
SB 183 calls for the establishment of the Border Trade Advisory Committee, with
a charge to define and develop a strategy and make recommendations to the
Commission and governor for addressing the highest priority border trade
transportation challenges. The BTAC met on July 19, 2006 and September 8,
2006, and during the meetings the following goals were developed:
1. Promote the development of ample and expandable trade transportation
corridors.
 Support the development of the Trans-Texas Corridor and other major
identified trade corridors to assist the expansion of Texas’ international
trade. Efficient multimodal trade corridors in Texas with connections to
the Mexican transportation system will foster Texas trade with Mexico
and other regions of the world.
 Develop policies to facilitate trade at both state and federal levels.
Trade facilitation policies supported by adequate transportation
infrastructure will stimulate the flow of goods in the state and improve
existing commercial corridors.
2. Develop coordination mechanisms to foster trade between Texas and
Mexico.
 Coordinate effectively with Mexico to ensure the planning and
development of through trade corridors. Formal and informal
coordination efforts with Mexican federal and state government
agencies are important to ensure the development of efficient U.S.Mexico trade corridors.
 Promote more efficient international border crossings. Existing
international border crossing procedures and infrastructure should be
examined on a continuing basis to identify efficiencies that could be
gained by coordinating with Mexican stakeholders. Future international
border crossing plans should be developed in close coordination with
Mexican and U.S. stakeholders to promote the efficient use of the
latest technologies, procedures and infrastructure on both sides of the
border.
 Promote cooperation with and understanding of U.S. policies. Constant
changes in U.S. security and safety policies impact the international
border crossing process and the overall trade between Texas and
Mexico. It is important to support cooperation efforts with Mexican
government agencies and the trade community so that new rules are
understood and their impact on international trade is minimized.
3. Leverage safety and security measures to enhance trade efficiencies.
 Promote efficiencies at international border crossings. By evaluating,
recommending and implementing various procedures, efficiencies
could be gained throughout international border crossings. Some of the
37
International Trade Corridor Plan



December 2006
efforts that have been discussed include eliminating the duplication of
the vehicle safety inspection, combining security facilities,
implementing interoperable technology, modifying hours of operation,
increasing staffing levels and applying demand management
techniques like off-peak incentives – value pricing.
Develop international border crossings that take advantage of the
latest technologies and procedures. New procedures and technologies
significantly impact the way the international border crossing
inspections are carried out and therefore the infrastructure needs at
international border crossings. Planned international border crossings
should be designed flexible enough to benefit from the latest
technology as well as to make it easy to change in the future when
new technologies are implemented, and expedite the design and
construction process.
Review Presidential Permit policy to facilitate international bridge
construction. Current Presidential Permit procedure to construct or
modify international bridges is lengthy and difficult to obtain. A
streamlined procedure would smooth the progress of any required
modification to take advantage of new technologies or processes.
Provide a balance between required inspections and efficient trade
flow.
4. Demonstrate the economic benefits of international trade at the national,
state and local levels.
 Identify national, statewide and international benefits of trade.
Increased land commercial trade not only benefits the local port of
entry where the transaction takes place but it has a ripple effect that
benefits the state and the nation as a whole. The Alameda Corridor
Project in California is an example of how a trade corridor improvement
could benefit not only the region but the whole nation.
The complete list of the BTAC strategies, including implementation actions,
measures, and responsible parties can be found in the appendix titled BTAC
Strategies starting on page 46.
7. CONCLUSION
The most pressing needs within Texas for international trade include constructing
ample and expandable transportation infrastructure, improving border
efficiencies, and coordinating efforts with Mexico. I-35 has been identified as the
most important international trade transportation corridor within the state followed
by I-10 and I-45. In addition to these needs, considerations should be made for
possible rerouting of trade between the United States and Asia. This increase in
trade volume due to rerouting could significantly impact the transportation needs
of Texas.
38
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
International trade is vital to Texas’ economy and likewise, Texas international
trade is important to the United States’ economy.
Without the proper
infrastructure, policies, planning, and financing, transportation can become a
hindrance to trade. On the other hand, adequate infrastructure for today and
tomorrow, good policies, proper planning, and innovative financing can stimulate
the movement of goods in and out of Texas.
39
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
APPENDIX
40
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table A1. Top 20 Commodity Imports from Mexico to Texas (2005)
Rank Code
Name
TX
1
85
Electrical machinery and equipment and parts
thereof; sound recorders and reproducers, television
image and sound recorders and reproducers, and
parts and accessories of such articles
2
84
Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical
appliances; parts thereof
$5,064,203,040
3
87
Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock,
and parts and accessories thereof
$4,216,423,554
4
90
5
94
6
7
8
9
98
72
22
73
10
62
11
12
13
14
15
16
39
1
8
70
69
7
17
27
18
19
74
83
20
20
Optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring,
checking, precision, medical or surgical instruments
and apparatus; parts and accessories thereof
Furniture; bedding, mattresses, mattress supports,
cushions and similar stuffed furnishings; lamps and
lighting fittings, not elsewhere specified or included;
illuminated sign illuminated nameplates and the like;
prefabricated buildings
Special classification provisions
Iron and steel
Beverages, spirits and vinegar
Articles of iron or steel
Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, not
knitted or crocheted
Plastics and articles thereof
Live animals
Edible fruit and nuts; peel of citrus fruit or melons
Glass and glassware
Ceramic products
Edible vegetables and certain roots and tubers
Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their
distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes
Copper and articles thereof
Miscellaneous articles of base metal
Preparations of vegetables, fruit, nuts or other parts of
plants
$11,299,243,903
$1,677,638,911
$1,557,173,154
$1,129,752,525
$831,968,649
$775,086,923
$735,698,251
$664,323,707
$579,268,616
$369,741,290
$347,297,410
$319,560,966
$306,757,105
$306,106,078
$276,925,801
$274,406,435
$239,091,766
$237,168,181
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/prod.html
41
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table A2. Top 20 Commodity Exports from Texas to Mexico (2005)
Rank Code
1
85
2
84
Name
TX
Electrical machinery and equipment and parts thereof;
sound recorders and reproducers, television image
$11,048,547,579
and sound recorders and reproducers, and parts and
accessories of such articles
Nuclear reactors, boilers, machinery and mechanical
$8,503,716,950
appliances; parts thereof
3
87
Vehicles other than railway or tramway rolling stock,
and parts and accessories thereof
4
39
5
90
6
27
7
73
8
48
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
74
76
2
72
52
29
40
16
59
17
18
38
83
19
94
20
62
$4,700,712,532
Plastics and articles thereof
Optical, photographic, cinematographic, measuring,
checking, precision, medical or surgical instruments
and apparatus; parts and accessories thereof
Mineral fuels, mineral oils and products of their
distillation; bituminous substances; mineral waxes
$4,156,533,769
Articles of iron or steel
Paper and paperboard; articles of paper pulp, of
paper or of paperboard
$1,183,743,073
Copper and articles thereof
Aluminum and articles thereof
Meat and edible meat offal
Iron and steel
Cotton
Organic chemicals
Rubber and articles thereof
Impregnated, coated, covered or laminated textile
fabrics; textile articles of a kind suitable for industrial
use
Miscellaneous chemical products
Miscellaneous articles of base metal
Furniture; bedding, mattresses, mattress supports,
cushions and similar stuffed furnishings; lamps and
lighting fittings, not elsewhere specified or included;
illuminated sign illuminated nameplates and the like;
prefabricated buildings
Articles of apparel and clothing accessories, not
knitted or crocheted
$1,680,187,836
$1,258,694,814
$818,213,848
$816,388,777
$716,203,336
$682,514,733
$609,925,220
$540,683,423
$523,942,355
$490,888,805
$332,766,163
$328,765,459
$326,871,399
$279,235,160
$231,998,399
Source: Bureau of Transportation Statistics,
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/prod.html
42
International Trade Corridor Plan
December 2006
Table A3. 2005 Texas-Mexico Trade by Port of Entry
Truck
Value (Millions USD)
Export
Import
Total
Weight*
(Tons)
Trucks
Rail
Value (Millions USD)
Export
Import
Total
El Paso &
Fabens
$17,311
$22,217
$ 39,528
3,463,483
1,047,060
$ 1,156
$ 1,883
$ 3,039
Presidio
$
$
149
$
379
80,534
5,763
$
11
$
0
$
11
5,172
-
Del Rio
$ 1,439
$ 1,599
$
3,038
283,092
146,680
$
0
$
0
$
0
10
-
Eagle Pass
$ 1,710
$ 2,573
$
4,283
667,389
193,533
$ 1,704
$ 1,685
$ 3,389
1,039,957
102,830
Laredo
Roma & Rio
Grande City
Hidalgo &
Progreso
$29,399
$37,427
$ 66,826
11,759,953
2,998,995
$11,278
$15,349
$26,627
5,675,931
409,406
$
$
$
312
404,774
97,876
$
0
$
0
$
0
-
-
$ 7,720
$10,658
$ 18,378
3,174,084
47,781
$
7
$
0
$
7
82
-
Brownsville
$ 5,475
$ 4,941
$ 10,416
1,418,171
400,623
$
757
$
168
$
925
327,344
45,766
Total
$63,432
$79,728
$143,160
21,251,480
4,938,311
$33,998
8,731,443
623,524
230
148
164
$14,913
$19,085
Weight*
(Tons)
1,682,947
65,522
RailBoxes
*Weights are imports only. Weight data for land exports are unavailable. All other values contain both imports and exports.
Trade Values Source:
http://www.bts.gov/cgi-bin/tbsf/tbdr/by_port_mex.pl
Trade Weights Source:
http://www.bts.gov/programs/international/transborder/prod.html
Truck Crossing Source:
http://texascenter.tamiu.edu/texcen_services/truck_crossings.asp?framepg=datatruck
Rail Crossing Source:
http://texascenter.tamiu.edu/texcen_services/rail_crossings.asp?framepg=datarail
International Trade Corridor Plan
Table A4. Freight Analysis Framework (FAF) and FAF2 Commodity Lists
and 1998-2020 Annual Growth Rates
FAF2
Code
38
34
4
2
1
3
35
26
5
37
36
9
8
6
7
30
20
23
22
31
21
41
14
28
25
43
33
39
31
FAF
Growth
Commodity Class
Stcc231
Stcc2 name
Rate
Precision instruments
6.3%
38
Instr/Optical/Watches/Clocks
Machinery excluding
Machinery
5.7%
35
electrical
Animal feed
5.5%
1
Farm
Cereal grains
5.5%
1
Farm
Live animals/fish
5.5%
1
Farm
Other ag prods.
5.5%
1
Farm
Electronics
5.4%
36
Electrical mach/Equip/Supp
Wood prods.
5.2%
25
Furniture/Fixtures
Meat/seafood
5.1%
9
Fish/Marine
Motorized vehicles***
4.9%
37
Transportation equipment
Transport equip.
4.9%
37
Transportation equipment
Natural sands
4.7%
32
Clay/Concrete/Glass/Stone
Tobacco prods.
4.7%
21
Tobacco
Alcoholic beverages
4.5%
20
Food/Kindred
Milled grain prods.
4.5%
20
Food/Kindred
Other foodstuffs
4.5%
20
Food/Kindred
Textiles/leather
4.2%
22
Textile mill
Basic chemicals
4.1%
28
Chemicals/Allied
Chemical prods.
4.1%
28
Chemicals/Allied
Fertilizers
4.1%
28
Chemicals/Allied
Nonmetal min.
prods.*
4.1%
28
Chemicals/Allied
Pharmaceuticals
4.1%
28
Chemicals/Allied
Waste/scrap
4.1%
40
Waste/Scrap materials
Metallic ores
4.0%
10
Metallic ores
Paper articles
4.0%
26
Pulp/Paper/Allied
Commodity unknown
3.4%
46
Freight all kind
Logs
3.4%
24
Lumber/Wood
Mixed freight
3.4%
46
Freight all kind
Articles-base metal
3.3%
34
Fabricated metal
Miscellaneous
Furniture
3.3%
39
manufacturing
2-digit Standard Transportation Commodity Classification code.
44
International Trade Corridor Plan
FAF2
Code
Commodity Class
FAF
Growth
Stcc231
Rate
Stcc2 name
Miscellaneous
40
Misc. mfg. prods.
3.3%
39
manufacturing
32
Base metals**
3.1%
33
Primary metal
15
Coal
3.0%
11
Coal
19
Coal, n.e.c. ****
3.0%
11
Coal
11
Newsprint/paper
2.6%
27
Printed matter
13
Nonmetallic minerals
2.6%
14
Non-metallic minerals
29
Printed prods.
2.6%
27
Printed matter
24
Plastics/rubber
2.4%
30
Rubber/Plastics
16
Crude petroleum
1.8%
13
Crude petro/Natural gas
17
Gasoline
1.8%
13
Crude petro/Natural gas
* Nonmetallic mineral products
** Base metal in primary or semi-finished forms and in finished basic shapes
*** Motorized and other vehicles (including parts)
**** Coal, n.e.c.: Coal and petroleum products, not elsewhere classified
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2006
45
International Trade Corridor Plan
Table A5. Texas International Trade Corridor Volume by All Modes of
Transportation (Imports and Exports)
2002
Corridor
I-10 Houston & Louisiana border
I-35 Laredo & San Antonio
I-35 San Antonio & Dallas
I-45 Houston & Dallas
I-35 Dallas & Oklahoma border
I-30 Dallas & Arkansas
I-10 San Antonio & Houston
US 59 Houston & Arkansas
border
I-10 El Paso & San Antonio
US 75 Dallas & Oklahoma border
US 59 US 77 & Houston
US 77 I-37 & Victoria
US 77 Brownsville & I-37
US 281 Texas Valley & I-37
I-37 Corpus Christi & San Antonio
I-40 Amarillo & TX Panhandle
I-20 El Paso & Dallas to Louisiana
US 69 Beaumont & US 75
US 287 Dallas & Amarillo
Ports to Plains I-27/US 87/I-10,
Amarillo & North
US 83 Laredo & Texas Valley
Tons
(millions)
73.6
36.2
27.8
26.5
26.0
15.3
9.8
Billions
USD
$
45.1
$
79.0
$
63.9
$
14.8
$
9.8
$
4.4
$
22.8
8.7
7.0
5.5
3.5
3.5
3.5
2.9
2.8
2.0
1.9
1.6
1.3
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
$
14.6
19.0
8.5
14.0
13.9
13.9
6.0
5.9
12.9
8.9
1.3
1.3
13.7
12.1
9.9
6.0
5.9
5.9
5.1
5.1
3.8
3.2
2.5
2.2
0.8
0.0
$
$
0.6
0.1
1.5
0.0
Source: Texas Transportation Institute, 2006
46
2020
Tons
(millions)
99.1
63.9
49.3
36.2
36.1
26.7
16.3
International Trade Corridor Plan
Figure A1. Congressional High Priority Corridor Map
Source: Federal Highway Administration,
http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/hep10/nhs/hipricorridors/hiprimap.html
47
International Trade Corridor Plan
BORDER TRADE ADVISORY COMMITTEE (BTAC) PRINCIPLES,
STRATEGIES, IMPLEMENTATION ACTIONS AND MEASURES
Introduction
SB 183 calls for the establishment of the Border Trade Advisory Committee
(BTAC), with a charge to define and develop a strategy and make
recommendations to the Texas Transportation Commission (commission) and
governor for addressing the highest priority border trade transportation
challenges. In determining actions to be taken on the recommendations, the
commission is to consider the importance of trade with Mexico, potential sources
of infrastructure funding at border ports, and the value of trade activity in the
department's districts adjacent to the Texas-Mexico border.
The BTAC met on July 19, 2006 and September 8, 2006, and during the
meetings the following goals were developed:
Primary Goal: Develop short-term recommendations that can be addressed
in the next legislative session.
Secondary Goal: Develop long-term recommendations to address at the
federal level and with Mexico.
Ten principles were developed by the committee members as the initial items
that should be part of the recommendations (not in priority order):
 Promote ample and expandable transportation trade corridors
 Effectively coordinate with Mexico to ensure through-trade corridors
 Promote efficiencies at the border
 Demonstrate statewide, national, and international benefits of trade
 Optimize operations
 Develop ports of entry for use of new technologies
 Support improvements to the Presidential Permit process
 Look for policies to facilitate trade at both state and federal levels
 Promote cooperation and understanding of policies with Mexico
 Leverage safety and security measures to enhance trade efficiency
The 10 principles were consolidated into four categories:

Trade Transportation Corridors

Coordination with Mexico

Safety and Security Measures

Economic Benefits of International Trade
The proposed strategies, implementation actions, measures of success, and the
responsible party(ies) for each category are presented in the following sections.
48
International Trade Corridor Plan
A. Trade Transportation Corridors
Promote the development of ample and expandable trade transportation
corridors.
1. Strategy: Support the development of the Trans-Texas Corridor (TTC) and
other major identified trade corridors to assist the expansion of Texas’
international trade. Efficient multimodal trade corridors in Texas with connections
to the Mexican transportation system will foster Texas trade with Mexico and
other regions of the world.
Implementation Action 1.1: Develop consensus and support for the
TTC – Short Term.
Measure 1.1: Local delegations demonstrate broad support through testimony at
Texas Transportation Commission meetings/hearings.
Responsible Parties 1.1: Local.
Implementation Action 1.2: Develop consensus and support for all major trade
corridors – Long Term.
Measure 1.2: Local delegations demonstrate broad support for future
Texas transportation projects.
Responsible Parties 1.2: Local.
Implementation
Action
1.3:
Develop
local
public-private partnerships to fund the TTC – Short Term.
support
for
Measure 1.3: Sufficient financial support to accelerate TTC development.
Responsible Parties 1.3: Local, state.
2. Strategy: Develop policies to facilitate trade at both state and federal levels.
Trade policies supported by adequate transportation infrastructure will stimulate
the flow of goods in the state and improve existing commercial corridors.
Implementation Action 2.1: Develop common measures of efficiency to reflect
trade throughput at all trade corridors to serve as a basis for establishing funding
priorities – Long Term.
Measure 2.1: Completion and adoption of measures by state and federal entities.
Responsible Parties 2.1: Local, state, federal.
49
International Trade Corridor Plan
B. Coordination with Mexico
Develop coordination mechanisms to foster trade between Texas and Mexico.
3. Strategy: Coordinate effectively with Mexico to ensure the planning and
development of through-trade corridors. Formal and informal coordination efforts
with Mexican federal and state government agencies are important to ensure the
development of efficient U.S.-Mexico trade corridors.
Implementation Action 3.1: Enhance bistate multimodal corridor planning
efforts through coordinated workshops – Short Term.
Measure 3.1: Number of workshops held for high-level, bistate, multimodal
corridor planning.
Responsible Parties 3.1: State, Mexico.
Implementation Action 3.2: Develop prioritized binational local improvement
plans – Short Term.
Measure 3.2: Number of prioritized binational local improvement plans
developed.
Responsible Parties 3.2: Local, Mexico.
4. Strategy: Promote more efficient international border crossings. Existing
international border crossing procedures and infrastructure should be examined
on a continuing basis to identify efficiencies that could be gained by coordinating
with Mexican stakeholders. Future international border crossing plans should be
developed in close coordination with Mexican and U.S. stakeholders to promote
the efficient use of the latest technologies, procedures and infrastructure on both
sides of the border.
Implementation Action 4.1: Harmonize private- and public-sector activities and
schedules to achieve maximum effective use of available international border
crossing infrastructure – Long Term.
Measure 4.1: Reduced average delay at all international border crossings.
Responsible Parties 4.1: Federal.
50
International Trade Corridor Plan
5. Strategy: Promote cooperation with, and understanding of, U.S. policies.
Constant changes in U.S. security and safety policies impact the international
border crossing process and the overall trade between Texas and Mexico. It is
important to support cooperation efforts with Mexican government agencies and
the trade community so that new rules are understood and their impact on
international trade is minimized.
Implementation Action 5.1: Organize and promote attendance to local
workshops for presentations by federal and state regulatory bodies, to include
extensive question and answer sessions with private sector and trade
communities – Short Term.
Measure 5.1: Number of workshops and attendance.
Responsible Parties 5.1: Federal.
51
International Trade Corridor Plan
C. Safety and Security Measures
Leverage safety and security measures to enhance trade efficiencies.
6. Strategy: Promote efficiencies at international border crossings. By
evaluating, recommending and implementing various procedures, efficiencies
can be gained throughout international border crossings. Some of the efforts that
have been discussed include eliminating the duplication of the vehicle safety
inspections, combining security facilities, implementing interoperable technology,
modifying hours of operation, increasing staffing levels and applying demand
management techniques like off-peak incentives – value pricing.
Implementation Action 6.1: Expand the use of the Free and Secure Trade
(FAST) program, and the proposed express lane at the Department of Public
Safety (DPS) inspection stations – Short Term.
Measure 6.1: Number of local stakeholders willing to participate in and promote
FAST and DPS programs.
Responsible Parties 6.1: Local.
Implementation Action 6.2: Evaluate the design of international border
crossings and local access points to ensure efficient use of FAST lanes – Short
Term.
Measure 6.2: Crossing time for FAST trucks compared to non-FAST trucks.
Responsible Parties 6.2: Federal.
Implementation Action 6.3: Evaluate operations at existing international border
crossings to ensure they are performing at optimum efficiencies – Long Term.
Measure 6.3: Commercial vehicle crossing time.
Responsible Parties 6.3: Federal.
52
International Trade Corridor Plan
7. Strategy: Develop international border crossings that take advantage of the
latest technologies and procedures. New procedures and technologies
significantly impact the way international border crossing inspections are carried
out and therefore the infrastructure needs at international border crossings.
Planned international border crossings should be designed with enough flexibility
to benefit from the latest technology and expedite the design and construction
process, as well as to make it easy to change in the future when new
technologies are implemented.
Implementation Action 7.1: Work with the General Services Administration and
other U.S. federal agencies to develop flexible user-oriented configurations and
practices for new or rehabilitated international border crossings – Long Term.
Measure 7.1: Conduct joint workshops with federal officials intended to achieve a
modified approach to international border crossing design.
Responsible Parties 7.1: Federal.
8. Strategy: Review Presidential Permit policy to facilitate international bridge
construction. Current Presidential Permit procedures to construct or modify
international bridges are lengthy and difficult to obtain. A streamlined procedure
will smooth the progress of any required modification to take advantage of new
technologies or processes.
Implementation Action 8.1: Develop and coordinate with binational federal
officials an approach to facilitate improvements to existing international border
crossings – Long Term.
Measure 8.1: Revised procedures for national consideration.
Responsible Parties 8.1: Local.
Implementation Action 8.2: Coordinate permitting process for new international
border crossings – Long Term.
Measure 8.2: Time required to obtain permits.
Responsible Parties 8.2: Local.
53
International Trade Corridor Plan
9. Strategy: Provide a balance between required inspections and efficient trade
flow.
Implementation Action 9.1: Ensure proper staffing, resource management and
appropriations for new international border crossings or expansion of existing
international border crossings that will allow for adequate inspections yet
ensuring efficient trade flow – Long Term.
Measure 9.1: Commercial vehicle crossing time and security level.
Responsible Parties 9.1: State, federal.
54
International Trade Corridor Plan
D. Economic Benefits of International Trade
Demonstrate the economic benefits of international trade at the national, state
and local levels.
10. Strategy: Identify national, statewide and international benefits of trade.
Increased land commercial trade not only benefits the local port of entry where
the transaction takes place but also has a ripple effect that benefits the state and
the nation as a whole. The Alameda Corridor Project in California is an example
of how a trade corridor improvement can benefit not only the region but the whole
nation.
Implementation Action 10.1: Review and implement previous recommendations
to quantify local, regional and national benefits of improved trade at the
Texas-Mexico border – Short Term.
Measure 10.1: Identify which actions must occur at the state or federal level to
provide trade benefits.
Responsible Parties 10.1: State.
Implementation Action 10.2: Perform economic impact analysis of trade on
local, state and national levels – Short Term.
Measure 10.2: Complete economic impact analysis of trade.
Responsible Parties 10.2: State.
Implementation Action 10.3: Establish an advocacy program led by the
four U.S. border governors to promote the benefits of trade efficiencies at the
state, national and international level – Short Term.
Measure 10.3: Success of advocacy program in Washington, D.C.
Responsible Parties 10.3: State.
55