Multimodal Freight Transportation Within the Great Lakes--Saint Lawrence Basin (2012)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E F R E I G H T R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCFRP REPORT 17 Subscriber Categories Freight Transportation • Planning and Forecasting • Economics Multimodal Freight Transportation Within the Great Lakes–Saint Lawrence Basin CPCS Transcom Limited Ottawa, Ontario, Canada i n a s s o c i at i o n w i t h University of Toledo Toledo, OH Economic Development Research Group Boston, MA Prime Focus LLC DePere, WI Sustainable Ports Brooklyn, NY Richard Stewart Great Lakes MaritiMe research institute Duluth, MN TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2012 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration

NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM America’s freight transportation system makes critical contributions to the nation’s economy, security, and quality of life. The freight transportation system in the United States is a complex, decentralized, and dynamic network of private and public entities, involving all modes of transportation—trucking, rail, waterways, air, and pipelines. In recent years, the demand for freight transportation service has been increasing fueled by growth in international trade; however, bottlenecks or congestion points in the system are exposing the inadequacies of current infrastructure and operations to meet the growing demand for freight. Strategic operational and investment de- cisions by governments at all levels will be necessary to maintain freight system performance, and will in turn require sound technical guidance based on research. The National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) is a cooperative research program sponsored by the Research and Innovative Technology Administration (RITA) under Grant No. DTOS59-06-G-00039 and administered by the Transportation Research Board (TRB). The program was authorized in 2005 with the passage of the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU). On September 6, 2006, a contract to begin work was executed between RITA and The National Academies. The NCFRP will carry out applied research on problems facing the freight industry that are not being adequately addressed by existing research programs. Program guidance is provided by an Oversight Committee comprised of a representative cross section of freight stakeholders appointed by the National Research Council of The National Academies. The NCFRP Oversight Committee meets annually to formulate the research program by identifying the highest priority projects and defining funding levels and expected products. Research problem statements recommending research needs for consideration by the Oversight Committee are solicited annually, but may be submitted to TRB at any time. Each selected project is assigned to a panel, appointed by TRB, which provides technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. Heavy emphasis is placed on including members representing the intended users of the research products. The NCFRP will produce a series of research reports and other products such as guidebooks for practitioners. Primary emphasis will be placed on disseminating NCFRP results to the intended end-users of the research: freight shippers and carriers, service providers, suppliers, and public officials. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America NCFRP REPORT 17 Project NCFRP-35 ISSN 1947-5659 ISBN 978-0-309-25830-2 Library of Congress Control Number 2012941218 © 2012 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FMCSA, FTA, RITA, or PHMSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for- profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or repro- duced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report.

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

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCFRP REPORT 17 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs William C. Rogers, Senior Program Officer Charlotte Thomas, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Scott E. Hitchcock, Editor NCFRP PROJECT 35 PANEL Freight Research Projects William D. Gardner, Minnesota DOT, St. Paul, MN (Chair) Doris Bautch, Whitehall, WI Ronald G. Chicka, Arrowhead Regional Development Commission-Metropolitan Interstate Council, Duluth, MN Steven A. Fisher, American Great Lakes Ports Association, Washington, DC Gloria J. Jeff, District of Columbia DOT, Washington, DC Raymond W. Johnston, Chamber of Marine Commerce, Ottawa, ON Steven Beningo, RITA Liaison Joedy W. Cambridge, TRB Liaison

NCFRP Report 17: Multimodal Freight Transportation Within the Great Lakes–Saint Law- rence Basin describes the current multimodal freight transportation system within this bi- national region (i.e., Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, Pennsylva- nia, New York, Ontario, and Quebec) and its importance to regional, U.S., and Canadian economies. The report also analyzes the system’s overall performance and related oppor- tunities and constraints to improving performance and to meeting projected freight flows. The multimodal freight transportation system in the Basin is complex. It spans numerous modes, geographies, and jurisdictions, and serves a wide variety of commodity and supply chains. The Basin generates 30% of the combined gross domestic product of the U.S. and Canada and is home to 31% of the two countries’ populations combined. The report includes an analysis of each mode’s capacity and the major commodities each of them moves; the barriers and constraints that impact each mode’s ability to move cargo; the performance implications in terms of major commodity supply chains (coal, automotive parts and machinery, containerized consumer goods, grains, and iron ore); and a strategic freight planning process for multimodal transport chain performance going forward. The Great Lakes–Saint Lawrence Basin of the United States contains a unique transporta- tion system with the nation’s largest rail hub in Chicago; the border with our largest trading partner, Canada; a robust ports and waterways system; and an extensive highway infrastruc- ture that serves the major industrial and agricultural heart of the nation, as well as provides vital transportation connections to the rest of North America and the world. Under NCFRP Project 35, CPCS Transcom Limited was asked to (1) define the existing multimodal freight transportation system in the Great Lakes–Saint Lawrence Basin; (2) describe the economic impacts by mode and major industry sector for each state and province as well as the Basin as a whole; (3) identify and describe the common recom- mendations, strategies, and policies in the existing freight plans for the states, provinces, and metropolitan planning organizations in the Basin; (4) identify opportunities and con- straints to improving regional freight transportation performance and development within the Basin, with emphasis on commercial navigation and port operations and the impact of the Harbor Maintenance Tax; and (5) develop a communication plan, including target audience, and tools and products (and their upkeep), to inform the public, decision makers, and private sectors of the relationship of the Great Lakes–Saint Lawrence Basin multimodal freight transportation system to the economic vitality of the region and the nation, as well as potential improvements for meeting projected freight flows. By William C. Rogers Staff Officer Transportation Research Board F O R E W O R D

1 Summary 9 Chapter 1 Background 9 1.1 Project Genesis 9 1.2 Objectives 11 Chapter 2 Research Approach 11 2.1 Project Structure 11 2.2 Methodology 11 2.2.1 Previous Literature 11 2.2.2 Use of Public Data 11 2.2.3 Stakeholder Consultations 13 2.2.4 Economic Impact Analysis 13 2.2.5 Stakeholder Validation 13 2.3 Caveats and Limitations 15 Chapter 3 Findings and Applications 15 3.1 GLSLB: Regional Context 15 3.1.1 Economic Importance of the GLSLB Region 15 3.1.2 Demographic Importance (Markets) 15 3.2 Economic Importance of the GLSLB Multimodal Freight Transportation System 15 3.2.1 The Impact of Freight Industries 17 3.2.2 Supply-Chain Impacts 19 3.2.3 Economic Impacts of Particular GLSLB Supply Chains 20 3.3 Description of the GLSLB Multimodal Freight Transportation System, by Mode 20 3.3.1 Marine 25 3.3.2 Rail 31 3.3.3 Road 37 3.3.4 Air 42 3.3.5 Pipeline 48 3.4 Performance of the GLSLB Multimodal Freight Transportation System 48 3.4.1 Understanding Freight Transportation Performance 49 3.4.2 Commodity Perspectives on Multimodal Freight Transportation Performance 53 3.4.3 Significance of Commodity Perspectives on Performance 56 3.4.4 Assessing Performance of the GLSLB Multimodal Freight Transportation System 57 3.4.5 Capacity 59 3.4.6 Efficiency and Competitiveness 60 3.4.7 Competitiveness of the Marine Mode C O N T E N T S

60 3.5 Constraints and Barriers to Transport-Chain Performance in GLSLB 60 3.5.1 Sufficiency of Data and Appropriate Performance Metrics 61 3.5.2 Barriers to Transport-Chain Integration 63 3.5.3 Lack of Mechanisms for Funding Multimodal Projects 63 3.5.4 Modal Inequality 64 3.5.5 Education 65 3.5.6 Labor 65 3.5.7 Concluding Comments on Barriers and Constraints 66 3.6 Initiatives and Opportunities to Improve Performance of GLSLB Multimodal Freight Transportation System 66 3.6.1 Multimodal, Multijurisdictional Freight Studies and Data 67 3.6.2 Freight Transportation Data 67 3.6.3 Multijurisdictional Initiatives 68 3.6.4 Multimodal Coordination Initiatives 70 3.6.5 Funding 70 3.6.6 Infrastructure and Investment 70 3.6.7 Education 71 3.7 Framework for Multimodal Freight Planning in the GLSLB and Beyond 75 3.7.1 Conclusion 76 3.7.2 Communication Plan 76 3.7.3 Future Research 78 Acronyms/Abbreviations 80 Appendix A Selection of Literature Reviewed 83 Appendix B Stakeholders Consulted 86 Appendix C Validation Invitation List 89 Appendix D Stakeholder Consultation Guide 93 Appendix E Webinar Follow-Up Survey Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.