TOOLKIT FOR HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
TRANSPORTATION EDUCATION
This work is sponsored by the U. S. Department of Transportation
Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
(PHMSA). It was conducted through the Hazardous Materials
Cooperative Research Program (HMCRP), which is administered
by the Transportation Research Board of the National Academies.
Prepared by
3 Sigma Consultants, LLC
909 Edenbridge Way, Nashville, TN 37215
Module 4: Hazmat Mode and Route
Selection
2
Learning Outcomes
At the end of this module students will be able to:
1. Describe the operational considerations associated with
selecting preferred modes and routes
2. Summarize relevant hazmat routing regulations
3. Recognize the tradeoffs that may exist in attempting to
satisfy efficiency, safety, security and environmental
criteria when making mode and route decisions
3
Topics
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Factors affecting mode choice
Route selection factors
Highway hazmat routing regulations
Railroad hazmat routing practices
Differences in highway and rail routing of hazmat
Different approaches in applying routing criteria
Community activism
4
Factors Affecting Hazmat Mode Choice
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Travel time and service reliability
Total logistics costs
Safety and security
Shipment size and weight
Hazardous materials properties and composition
Container characteristics
Availability of infrastructure access/egress
Equipment availability
Local restrictions (e.g., bridges, tunnels, highway weights)
Intermodal considerations
5
Route Selection Factors
• Efficiency
–
–
–
–
Trip length
Travel time
Availability of diversion route
Access to en route storage and repair facilities
• Safety & Security
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
–
Condition of infrastructure
Height, width, weight and traffic conflict considerations
Accident likelihood
Population exposure
Number of transfers
Proximity to critical infrastructure and iconic targets
Emergency response capability
Safe stopping places
• Environmental
– Wildlife and vegetation exposure
– Soil composition
– Proximity to surface and ground water
6
Sample Critical Infrastructure and Iconic Targets
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Bridges
Tunnels
Dams
Grade crossings
Government offices
Military bases
Sports facilities
Major banks
Chemical plants
Utilities
Religious shrines
National landmarks
Science laboratories
Nuclear reactor sites
7
Highway Hazmat Routing Regulations (49 CFR Part 397)
• Radioactive Materials (RAM) and Highway Route Control
Quantities (HRCQ)
– Base rule – Follow State-designated route or Interstate system
highway to reduce time in transit
– Route analysis/designation responsibility – State/tribal/local
governments
– Coordination – continuity, jurisdictional, public process
• Highway Non-RAM Hazmat (NRHM)
– Base rule – Follow State-designated route or simply “operate over
routes which do not go through heavily populated areas, places where
crowds assembled, tunnels or alleys”.
– Route analysis/designation responsibility – State/tribal/local
governments
– Coordination – continuity, jurisdictional, public process
Source: Battelle Memorial Institute
8
Highway Routing Factors (49 CFR Part 397)
NRHM
Radioactive Materials
•
•
•
•
•
• Placarded Non-HRCQ RAM
– Minimize radiological risk:
• Accident rates
• Transit time
• Population density and
activities
• Time of day, day of week
• HRCQ RAM
– Preferred route
• State-designated or
Interstate system highway
• Reduce time in transit
– Route deviations
• Pickup and deliveries
• Emergencies
– Circuity rule
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Population density
Type of highway
Types and quantities of HM
Emergency response capabilities
Results of consultation with
affected persons
Exposure and other risk factors
Terrain considerations
Continuity of routes
Alternative routes
Effects on commerce
Delays in transportation
Climate
Congestion and accident history
Source: Battelle Memorial Institute
9
Railroad Practices Related to Hazmat Routing
• Utilize AAR’s Recommended
Railroad Operating Practices for
Transportation of Hazardous
Materials
• Provisions include:
• Key Trains
• Key Routes
• Yard Operating Practices
Source: Association of American Railroads, Battelle Memorial Institute
10
Key Trains
• Defined as:
• One tankcar load of ppoison or toxic inhalation hazard (PIH or TIH),
anhydrous ammonia (AA) or ammonia solutions
• 20 carloads or intermodal portable tanks of a combination of PIH, TIH,
AA, ammonia solutions, flammable gas, Class 1.1 or 1.2 explosives, and
environmentally sensitive chemicals
• One or more carloads of spent nuclear fuel (SNF) or high level radioactive
waste (HLRW)
• Restrictions:
•
•
•
•
Maximum speed of 50 MPH
Unless siding is rated as Class 2 or higher, key train holds main track
Car must be equipped with roller bearings
If visual inspection cannot confirm a defect bearing reported by a wayside
detector, train will not exceed 30 MPH until passing next detector or
inspection
• If second wayside detector confirms defect, car must be pulled off of train
Source: Association of American Railroads, Battelle Memorial Institute
11
Key Routes
• Any track carrying a combination of 10,000 carloads or
intermodal portable tank loads of hazmat, or a combination
of 4,000 loads of PIH/TIH, AA, flammable gas, Class 1.1 or 1.2
explosives, environmentally sensitive chemicals, SNF or HLRW
in one year
• Requirements:
– Wayside bearing detectors or equivalent technology no more than 40
miles apart
– Main line track inspected by rail defect detection and track geometry
cars or equivalent no less than 2 times/year; sidings no less than once
per year
– Periodic inspections of main track and sidings for cracks or breaks in
joint bars
Source: Association of American Railroads, Battelle Memorial Institute
12
Yard Operating Practices
• Coupling speeds of loaded tank cars not to exceed 4 MPH
• Loaded PIH/TIH, AA or flammable gas cars cut off in motion in
no more than 2-car cuts
• Cars cut off in motion coupled to loaded PIH, TIH, AA or
flammable gas cars in no more than 2-car cuts
Source: Association of American Railroads, Battelle Memorial Institute
13
Rail Hazmat Routing Regulations (HM-232)*
1. Applicability
a.
b.
c.
Explosives 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 greater than 5,000 lbs
Bulk quantity of PIH/TIH materials
HRCQ radioactive materials
2. Route Analysis
a.
Use specified routing factors to analyze safety and security risks for
current routes
3. Alternative Route Analysis
a.
Identify at least one “commercially practicable” alternative route
and analyze safety and security risks
4. Route Selection
a.
b.
c.
Select route posing the “least overall safety and security risk”;
annual review required
Institute measures to address vulnerabilities and risk identified
Restrict distribution and access to data and routing analyses as
sensitive security information (SSI)
*49 CFR Part 172 contains this requirement
14
Rail Hazmat Routing Regulations (HM-232)
5. Completion of Route Analysis
a.
Comprehensive, system-wide review of operations that could impact
safety and security analyses every five years
6. Limitations on Actions by States
a.
States, political subdivisions and tribes may not designate, limit or
prohibit use of any rail line unless obtain waiver of preemption
7. Storage and Delays in Transit
a.
Minimize time in transit; procedures for notifications; restrict access;
etc.
8. Compliance and Enforcement
a.
Not required to submit analyses or route decisions, but must have
available for inspection
15
Rail Route Analysis Factors
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Volume of hazmat
Rail traffic density
Trip length
Railroad facilities
Track type and class
Track grade and curvature
Signals and train control
systems
Wayside detectors
Number and types of grade
crossings
Single vs. double track
Frequency and locations of
track turnouts
Proximity to iconic targets
Environmentally sensitive areas
Population density
Source: Battelle Memorial Institute
• Venues along route
• Emergency response capability
along route
• Areas of high consequence
• Passenger traffic
• Speed of train operations
• Proximity to en route storage or
repair facilities
• Known threats (from TSA)
• Measures in place to address
safety and security risks
• Availability of alternative routes
• Past incidents
• Overall time in transit
• Training and skill level of crews
• Impact on rail network traffic and
operations
16
Differences in Highway and Rail Routing of Hazmat
• Private vs. public right-of-way
• Fewer routing alternatives between any given origindestination pair for rail
• Larger quantities per container by rail
• Train consists vs. individual trucks
• Carrier interchanges by rail
• Population proximity to right-of-way along route
• Avoiding urban areas/center cities more difficult by rail
Source: Battelle Memorial Institute
17
Different Approaches In Applying Routing Criteria
• Require a route to pass across a segment that presents a low
risk.
• Require a route to avoid a segment that presents a high risk
(i.e., hot spot).
• Allow a route to use a high-risk segment, but impose a
penalty (i.e., added cost) to any candidate route that would
include that segment.
18
Critical Infrastructure & Iconic Target Hotspots and
Hazmat Restricted Segments on the Highway Network in
the Southeast U.S.
Iconic target
Critical infrastructure
Hazmat restriction
19
Colorado Truck Routes for
Hazardous and Nuclear Shipments
Community Activism
• Communities located along major hazardous materials transport
routes have long feared the possibility of a hazardous materials
release.
• There have been historic occurrences of such events with severe
consequences (e.g., Graniteville, SC).
• Organized opposition has often formed to dissuade carriers from
moving particularly dangerous hazardous cargo through a
community (NIMBY – not in my backyard).
• Hazmat shippers and carriers are actively working with these
communities to improve hazmat transport safety and security,
through such initiatives as:
– TRANSCAER (Transportation Community Awareness and Emergency
Response)
– Participation in State Emergency Response Commissions (SERCs) and Local
Emergency Planning Committees (LEPCs)
– Hosting Capability Assessment Programs (CAPs)
21
Key Takeaways
• Hazardous materials shippers select preferred modes based on
the characteristics of the cargo and the ability of the mode to
satisfy the desired transport requirements.
• Hazmat route selection is heavily regulated for the truck and
rail industry, in terms of designated routes and requiring route
risk assessments that consider a variety of economic, safety,
security and environmental factors.
• Tradeoffs exist among routing options in terms of their ability
to satisfy various criteria, leading shippers, carriers and
regulators to identify preferred routes based on criteria
importance.
22
Student Exercise
The table below presents the results of an analysis that was performed on six hazardous
materials highway routing options.
1) Based on the information provided, which route would you select as the preferred
option? Explain your method and show how it was applied in determining the preferred
route.
2) Report back on your methodology during the next session for comparison with others to
identify the most desirable method(s).
Route
Option
Trip
Length
(miles)
Population
Density (per
sq. mile)
Proximity to
Iconic Targets
Proximity to
Enviro.
Sensitive
Areas
Accident
Likelihood
1
10.7
16,200
High
Low
Low
Excellent
2
33.2
6,600
High
Medium
Low
Good
3
47.0
3,700
Low
Low
4
19.5
15,900
Medium
Medium
5
24.4
6,600
Medium
High
Medium
6
38.2
3,600
Low
Low
Low
Medium
High
Emergency
Response
Capability
Fair
Excellent
Good
Poor
23
Resources for Support and Additional Learning
Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49: Transportation, Part 397 Transportation of Hazardous Materials; Driving and Parking Rules, Subpart
C - Routing of Non-Radioactive Hazardous Materials and Subpart D Routing of Class 7 (Radioactive) Materials
Hazardous Materials: Enhancing Rail Transportation Safety and Security
for Hazardous Materials Shipments, Federal Register, November 26, 2008
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/counsel/EnhancingRailTransportation
SafetyAndSacurityForHazardousMaterialsShipments.pdf
Association of American Railroads, Recommended Railroad Operating
Practices For Transportation of Hazardous Materials
http://boe.aar.com/boe/pdf/CPC-1220_OT-55-L.pdf
American Waterway Operators, Facts About the American Tugboat,
Towboat and Barge Industry,
http://www.americanwaterways.com/industry_stats/facts_about_ind/fac
tsabout.pdf
24