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 30 Subscriber Categories Freight Transportation â¢ Marine Transportation â¢ Terminals and Facilities Making U.S. Ports Resilient as Part of Extended Intermodal Supply Chains Frank Southworth GeorGia institute of technoloGy Atlanta, GA Jolene Hayes Shannon McLeod Parsons Brinckerhoff, inc. Norfolk, VA Anne Strauss-Wieder a. strauss-Wieder, inc. Westfield, NJ TRANSPORTAT ION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2014 www.TRB.org Research sponsored by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE FREIGHT RESEARCH PROGRAM Americaâs freight transportation system makes critical contributions to the nationâs 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 transportationâtrucking, rail, waterways, air, and pipelines. In recent years, the demand for freight transportation service has been increasing fueled by growth in international trade; however, bottlenecks or congestion points in the system are exposing the inadequacies of current infrastructure and operations to meet the growing demand for freight. Strategic operational and investment decisions by governments at all levels will be necessary to maintain freight system performance, and will in turn require sound technical guidance based on research. The National Cooperative Freight Research Program (NCFRP) is a cooperative research program sponsored by the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology 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 the Research and Innovative Technology Admin- istration, which is now the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, 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 30 Project NCFRP-37 ISSN 1947-5659 ISBN 978-0-309-28423-3 Library of Congress Control Number 2014944444 Â© 2014 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, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, or PHMSA endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Freight Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturersâ 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. C. D. Mote, Jr., 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 Academyâs 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. C. D. Mote, Jr., 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 Boardâs 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 30 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs William C. Rogers, Senior Program Officer Charlotte Thomas, Senior Program Assistant Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Hilary Freer, Senior Editor NCFRP PROJECT 37 PANEL Freight Research Projects Thomas H. Wakeman, III, Stevens Institute of Technology, Hoboken, NJ (Chair) James M. Dwyer, Maryland Port Administration, Baltimore, MD Jeff Lillycrop, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Jon S. Meyer, Baltimore, MD Annie Protopapas, Texas A&M Transportation Institute, College Station, TX Roberta E. Weisbrod, Sustainable Ports, Brooklyn, NY W. Scott Brotemarkle, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The reportâs authors would like to thank the many individuals who gave their time and shared their expertise during the many telephone and in-person discussions held with members of the research team. The level of cooperation received was excellent throughout. No opinions expressed by the authors of this report are to be ascribed to specific individuals or companies.
NCFRP Report 30: Making U.S. Ports Resilient as Part of Extended Intermodal Supply Chains builds on NCHRP Report 732: Methodologies to Estimate the Economic Impacts of Disruptions to the Goods Movement System to provide a set of high-level guidelines, illus- trated by two case studies, that will help seaport authorities (as well as state DOTs in which such ports are located) to minimize lost throughput capacity resulting from a major dis- ruption. The report focuses on identifying and elaborating on the steps needed to coordi- nate freight movements through ports in times of severe stress on existing operating infra- structures and services whether being stressed because of damage to port facilities, to the highway, rail, and waterway routes leading into and out of the port, or because of the need to handle additional cargo volumes due to port disruptions elsewhere. The catchall term used for such efforts is port resiliencyâthe ability of a port to withstand and bounce back from a serious threat to its ability to process freight in an efficient, cost-effective manner. How resilient a port is depends on many different factors. From a purely physical process- ing standpoint, resilience means ensuring that freight gets into, is suitably processed by, and gets out of the port as expeditiously as possible. Given the considerable expense of providing redundant cargo handling capacity, a key to effective disruption response and subsequent recovery is to identify the primary steps in the cargo moving, manifesting, and storage pro- cesses involved; who is in charge of each processing step; who and which agencies need to be kept informed of progress; and who will have a decision-making role in changing operating rules and procedures when a disruption occurs. Under NCFRP Project 37, the Georgia Institute of Technology was asked to (1) review the literature on past disruption events, with an emphasis on specific actions that helped to limit the extent or duration of a disruption; (2) conduct expert interviews (with seaport operators, truck, rail, and ocean vessel carriers) to obtain their views on current levels of port resiliency, as well as on the most effective means of increasing resiliency and speeding recovery should a disruption occur; (3) conduct two in-depth case studies of recent port disruptions, Superstorm Sandyâs impacts on the major East Coast ports and the extended lock closures along the Columbia River System in the Pacific Northwest; and (4) develop high-level guidelines suitable for public-sector decisionmakers who might become involved in a disruption recovery event. F O R E W O R D By William C. Rogers Staff Officer Transportation Research Board
1 Chapter 1 Introduction 1 1.1 Project Background and Purpose 2 1.2 Report Organization 3 Chapter 2 Literature Review 3 2.1 Content and Organization 4 2.2 Nature of the Challenge 13 2.3 Issues Raised by Past Port Disruptions 18 2.4 Promising Practices and Possible Planning Frameworks 25 2.5 Summary 26 2.6 Literature Review References 30 Chapter 3 Interviews with Supply Chain Experts 30 3.1 Introduction 31 3.2 Differences in Types of Port Disruptions 31 3.3 Communications and the Flow of Information 35 3.4 Physical Infrastructure 39 3.5 Regulatory Issues 41 3.6 References 41 Appendix 3A: Interview Guide 1 43 Chapter 4 Case Study: Response to and Recovery from Superstorm Sandy 43 4.1 Introduction 44 4.2 Description of Superstorm Sandy 47 4.3 Characterizing Superstorm Sandyâs Disruption of the Supply Chain 50 4.4 Topographies of Import and Export Containerized Cargo Operations 54 4.5 Superstorm Sandy Preparations 57 4.6 Superstorm Sandyâs Impacts on Port Operations 64 4.7 Superstorm Sandy Port-Related Business Recovery 69 4.8 Lessons Learned 70 4.9 References 70 Appendix 4A: Interview Guide 2 72 Chapter 5 Case Study: Columbia River Closure 72 5.1 Introduction 76 5.2 Columbia-Snake River Closure Impacts 77 5.3 Columbia-Snake River Closure Preparations and Response and Recovery Efforts 83 5.4 Lessons Learned and Actions Taken 86 5.5 References 87 Appendix 5A: Interview Guide 3 C O N T E N T S
89 Chapter 6 Synthesis of Findings 89 6.1 Introduction 90 6.2 Influences of Prior Warning and Severity of Port Disruptions 91 6.3 Protecting and Using Physical/Logistical Assets 92 6.4 Maintaining Frequent Communications and Information Flow 92 6.5 Dealing with Regulatory Compliance Issues 93 6.6 Example Port Disruption Rules of Thumb Table 93 6.7 Possible Next Steps 98 6.8 References 99 Abbreviations 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.