Cross-Border Hazardous Materials Transportation Study: El Paso, Texas

Saving Lives, Time and Resources March 2013

CROSS-BORDER HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TRANSPORTATION STUDY: EL PASO, TEXAS

by

David Bierling, Ph.D. Edwin Varela Associate Research Scientist Graduate Assistant Researcher

Juan Carlos Villa Edward (Luke) Cowsar Program Manager Student Worker II

Debbie Jasek Alexis Garcia Research Specialist Student Worker III

Arturo Bujanda Associate Research Specialist

Project performed by Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research

In cooperation with Texas Department of Public Safety, Texas Division of Emergency Management

Report No. 186052-00003-1 Project No. 186052-00003: Analysis of Hazardous Materials Shipment Information for Truck Traffic in the El Paso Region

March 2013

Report prepared by Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute 4050 Rio Bravo, Suite 151 El Paso, Texas 79902

TEXAS A&M 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 Disclaimer and Acknowledgments ...... vii Abstract ...... viii Executive Summary ...... 1 1 Purpose and Overview ...... 3 2 El Paso Border Region ...... 4 2.1 Cargo Generators...... 4 2.2 Cargo Transport Infrastructure ...... 7 2.2.1 Roadways ...... 7 2.2.2 Railways ...... 9 2.2.3 Airports ...... 11 3 Previous HazMat Transport Studies ...... 12 3.1 Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Study (1998) ...... 12 3.2 Transboundary Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Survey (2004) ...... 14 4 Project Tasks ...... 17 4.1 Kickoff Meetings...... 17 4.2 Coordinate Data Collection ...... 17 4.2.1 Zaragoza POE ...... 17 4.2.2 Anthony POE ...... 18 4.3 Collect Data ...... 18 4.3.1 Zaragoza POE ...... 21 4.3.2 Anthony POE ...... 26 4.4 Process Data ...... 29 4.5 Analyze Data ...... 30 4.6 Document Results ...... 30 4.7 Present Results ...... 30 5 2012 Zaragoza POE HazMat Survey Results ...... 31 5.1 Video Data Analysis...... 31 5.2 Shipping Manifest Data Analysis ...... 37 5.2.1 Shipment Types, Origins, and Destinations ...... 38 5.2.2 Carrier Safety Information ...... 45 5.2.3 Comparison with Data from 2004 Survey ...... 47 5.3 Other Analysis of Inbound Truck Traffic ...... 48 5.4 Summary FOR Zaragoza POE ...... 52 6 2012 Anthony POE HazMat Survey Results ...... 54 6.1 Manual Truck Count Analysis ...... 54

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page i 6.2 Shipping Manifest Data Analysis ...... 61 6.2.1 Shipment Types, Origins, and Destinations ...... 61 6.2.2 Carrier Safety Information ...... 76 6.3 Summary for Anthony POE ...... 79 7 Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 80 7.1 Conclusions ...... 80 7.2 Recommendations ...... 80 7.2.1 Use Project Results ...... 80 7.2.2 Keep the Data Current ...... 81 7.2.3 Expand the Knowledge Basis ...... 81 References ...... 84

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page ii LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Location of Potential Freight Generators in El Paso-Ciudad Juarez Binational Region...... 5 Figure 2. Location of Industrial Parks and Maquiladoras in Ciudad Juarez...... 6 Figure 3. Existing Truck Routes and HazMat Cargo Routes in El Paso, and Major Arterials in Ciudad Juarez...... 8 Figure 4. El Paso Rail Network...... 10 Figure 5. Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry in South El Paso, Texas...... 19 Figure 6. MTP Anthony Port of Entry to the Northwest of El Paso, Texas...... 20 Figure 7. Truck Screening and Shipping Manifest Surveyor Locations at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry...... 22 Figure 8. Screening Trucks for Shipping Manifest Data Collection at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry...... 23 Figure 9. Collecting Shipping Manifest Data at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry...... 25 Figure 10. Truck Screening and Shipping Manifest Surveyor Locations at Anthony POE...... 27 Figure 11. Screening Trucks for Shipping Manifest Data Collection at Anthony POE...... 28 Figure 12. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Observed Inbound Weekday Truck Traffic Levels...... 33 Figure 13. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Truck Traffic by Truck Type...... 34 Figure 14. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Percentage of Inbound Placarded Truck Traffic...... 35 Figure 15. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Observed Weekday Truck Traffic on I-10 WB...... 56 Figure 16. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Observed Weekday Truck Traffic by Truck Type on I-10 WB...... 57 Figure 17. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday Percentage of Placarded Tank Truck Traffic on I-10 WB...... 58

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page iii

LIST OF TABLES

Page Table 1. Existing Truck Routes and HazMat Cargo Routes in El Paso...... 7 Table 2. Truck Types and Counts Included in 1997 Cross-Border HazMat Survey...... 12 Table 3. HazMat Commodities and Truck Loadings in 1997 Cross-Border HazMat Survey...... 12 Table 4. Spill Histories by Transport Source in 1998 Cross-Border HazMat Study Report...... 13 Table 5. Major Transported, Placarded Commodities by Number of Truckloads for Inbound and Outbound Trucks at Zaragoza Bridge as Reported for March 15–19, 2004, Survey...... 15 Table 6. Truck Condition by Direction as Reported in 2004 Transboundary Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Survey Report...... 16 Table 7. Hours of Video-Recorded Data included in Zaragoza POE Traffic Evaluation...... 31 Table 8. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Inbound Truck Size and Type and HazMat Placard Observations...... 36 Table 9. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: HazMat Placard IDs...... 37 Table 10. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Number of Placards by Primary HazMat Class/Division...... 37 Table 11. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: HazMat Placard IDs on Inbound Trucks...... 38 Table 12. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Tank Truck Loading Classifications...... 39 Table 13. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Hydrofluoric Acid...... 40 Table 14. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Liquefied Petroleum Gas...... 40 Table 15. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Nitrogen (Refrigerated)...... 40 Table 16. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Carbon Dioxide (Refrigerated.)...... 42 Table 17. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Liquid Environmentally Hazardous Substances, Hazardous Waste, or Other Regulated Substances...... 42 Table 18. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Marked for Elevated Temperature Liquids...... 43 Table 19. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Airbag Modules...... 43 Table 20. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: HazMat Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Not Placarded...... 44 Table 21. Carrier Safety Information for Inbound Trucks from Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Survey...... 46 Table 22. Comparison of Top Commodities (2004) and Observed Placards (2012) on Inbound Trucks at Zaragoza POE...... 48

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page iv Table 23. Manual Count Data: Non-HazMat Commodity Categories and Types on Inbound Trucks during Survey Hours at Zaragoza POE on June 11, 12, and 14, 2012...... 49 Table 24. Hours of Manual Truck Traffic Count Data from Westbound I-10, Anthony POE, Doña Ana County, New Mexico...... 54 Table 25. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday Truck Size and Type and HazMat Placard Observations...... 59 Table 26. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday ‘Most Frequent’ UN/NA Placard IDs on Observed Trucks...... 60 Table 27. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Number of Placards, by Primary HazMat Class/Division, on Observed Trucks...... 61 Table 28. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: ‘Most Frequent’ UN/NA Placard IDs on Surveyed Trucks...... 62 Table 29. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Number of HazMat Placards, by HazMat Class/Division, on Surveyed Trucks...... 63 Table 30. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Tank Truck Loading Classifications...... 64 Table 31. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 2 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks...... 65 Table 32. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 3 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks...... 66 Table 33. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 5.1 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks...... 67 Table 34. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 6.1 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks...... 67 Table 35. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 8 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks...... 68 Table 36. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 9 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed Trucks...... 69 Table 37. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: O-D Pairs and Associated Frequencies, Ranks, and Percentages for Shipments on Surveyed Trucks...... 70 Table 38. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: O-D Pairs and Associated Frequencies, Number of Equivalent Trucks, Shipment/Truck Ratios, and O-D Distances for Shipments on Surveyed Trucks...... 71 Table 39. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in El Paso, Texas, by HazMat Class...... 73 Table 40. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, by HazMat Class...... 73 Table 41. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Houston, Texas, by HazMat Class...... 74 Table 42. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Corpus Christi, Texas, by HazMat Class...... 74 Table 43. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in the Valley, Texas, by HazMat Class...... 74 Table 44. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Las Cruces, NM, by HazMat Class...... 75

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page v Table 45. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Albuquerque, NM, by HazMat Class...... 76 Table 46. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Lordsburg-Deming, NM, and Silver City, NM, by HazMat Class...... 76 Table 47. Carrier Safety Information for Trucks from Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Survey...... 77

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page vi DISCLAIMER AND ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

The research presented in this report was funded by Texas A&M Transportation Institute’s Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research. Dr. David Bierling was the Principal Investigator for the project, and Ms. Debbie Jasek was Co-Principal Investigator. Funding for this study provided an in-kind match for a hazardous materials commodity flow study that was conducted in 2012 for El Paso, Texas, and the I-10 Corridor in West and Central Texas, which was funded by the Texas Division of Emergency Management. We gratefully acknowledge the support and participation of the following organizations and individuals in this project:

Texas Department of Public Safety, Texas Highway Patrol, Commercial Vehicle Enforcement Captain Jessie Mendez Lieutenant Matthew Scales Sergeant Thomas Curry Troopers and Texas Department of Motor Vehicles Commercial Vehicle Inspectors at the Ysleta- Zaragoza Port of Entry in El Paso, Texas

New Mexico Department of Public Safety, Motor Transport Police Captain Tim LaBier Port Supervisor William Carpenter Troopers and Commercial Vehicle Inspectors at the Anthony Port of Entry in Anthony, New Mexico

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 6 Border Liaison Office Dr. Carlos Rincon, Director Ms. Maria Sisneros, E.I.T., Environmental Engineer

City of El Paso Fire Department, Special Operations Division Battalion Chief Rafael Reyes FST Marco Alvarado FST Alejandro Rodriguez Command staff and firefighters of EPFD Hazardous Materials Response Team

Doña Ana County Local Emergency Planning Committee Assistant Fire Marshal Eric Crespin, Doña Ana County Fire & Emergency Services Emergency Management Supervisor David Almaguer, Doña Ana County Office of Emergency Management LEPC members and affiliated organizations

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page vii ABSTRACT

A hazardous materials (HazMat) truck traffic and shipping manifest study was conducted at the Yselta-Zaragoza Port of Entry in El Paso, Texas, and at the Anthony, Port of Entry in Anthony, New Mexico, in 2012. Truck traffic information presented in this report includes estimated truck traffic levels, as well as truck size, type, and HazMat placards. HazMat shipping manifest information includes truck configurations and body types, HazMat placards, shipment origin and destination, commodity name, commodity UN/NA number, shipment quantities, and shipment packaging configurations. This report complements a hazardous materials commodity flow study that was conducted in 2012 for roadways and railways in El Paso County, and along the I-10 Corridor in West and Central Texas.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page viii EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report presents the results of hazardous materials truck traffic and shipping manifest surveys that were conducted at two locations in the El Paso region. The first location documented HazMat shipments on inbound truck traffic at the Zaragoza International Port of Entry (POE) between the U.S. and Mexico, the second location documented HazMat shipments on westbound I-10 from Texas into New Mexico at the Anthony, New Mexico, POE.

Emergency responders, elected officials, community and transportation planners, and the general public must be aware of and prepared for the potential of HazMat incidents wherever these types of materials are transported, or at fixed facilities where they are stored, produced, or consumed. The primary purpose of this report is to provide information that can be used to enhance HazMat transport incident planning, preparedness, and response.

There is strong diversity and industrial capacities that promote manufacturing and bi-national trade in the El Paso-Juarez region. However, the types and quantities of hazardous materials transported by truck into the U.S. from Mexico at Zaragoza POE are limited and were not significantly different for data collected in 2004 and 2012. Bulk HazMat shipments consist primarily of flammable and non-flammable gases. These shipments are mostly empty tank trucks returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments in Mexico. There are also loaded, inbound bulk shipments by tank truck of hydrofluoric acid, a corrosive, toxic material. Non-bulk shipments of hazardous materials into the U.S. from Mexico at Zaragoza POE are primarily airbag modules.

In contrast, the I-10 trade corridor in the El Paso-New Mexico area has a much higher level and greater diversity of HazMat transport. This includes regional deliveries of bulk fuel and gases to New Mexico, and long-haul bulk and breakbulk shipments through New Mexico of gases, flammable liquids, oxidizers, poisonous and toxic materials, corrosive materials, and miscellaneous dangerous goods. While there are also shipments of radioactive materials over the corridor, there were no shipments of these materials included in our survey.

We did not find much evidence to support the idea of ‘dangerous trucks from Mexico’ that transport hazardous materials into the U.S. at El Paso. In fact, there were proportionately more trucks in our surveys at the Anthony POE that belonged to carriers which have higher than average FMCSA out-of-service (OOS) ratings for vehicles, drivers, and hazardous materials, than at the Zaragoza POE. There were also multiple trucks in our survey at Anthony POE whose carriers have higher than average OOS ratings in multiple categories.

Based strictly on truck traffic and HazMat shipping manifest data, and carrier safety information, the general likelihood of a HazMat transport incident appears to be greater over the I-10 corridor than at Zaragoza POE. This does not mean, however, that there is no risk of a HazMat incident at Zaragoza POE.

Reports for a regional hazardous materials commodity flow study, funded by the Texas Division of Emergency Management and conducted by Texas A&M Transportation Institute (TTI), were provided separately to the City of El Paso Fire Department on behalf of the El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee. We encourage officials and agencies in the El

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 1 Paso region, as well as other local, state, and federal stakeholders, to use the information in these studies. Suggestions include:  Using the information to enhance emergency operations plans and standard operating procedures for response, and informing emergency response training and exercises.  Integrating the information into community and transportation planning, not only to account for transport of hazardous materials, but also commercial vehicle traffic in general.  Using information about demographics and proximity to transport infrastructures to identify population risks due to chemical exposures and anticipated responses to emergency warnings such as evacuation and/or shelter-in-place notifications.  Keeping data current by updating hazmat transportation and shipping manifest studies to identify changes in transportation patterns and potential exposures to populations.

We also identified potential future research projects that can help expand the knowledge basis about HazMat transportation, and potential effects on vulnerable populations in the El Paso region and other areas. Recommendations for future research include:  Conducting an expanded shipping manifest study at Anthony POE on I-10 to account for nighttime, weekend, and/or seasonal traffic. Such a study might also include whether commercial vehicles are attempting to bypass truck inspection facilities.  Evaluating shipping manifests for other commercial vehicle inspection stations on I-10 or other roadways in Texas and/or other states.  Working with DOT-certified commercial vehicle inspectors to include truck inspection data with shipping manifest survey analysis.  Assessing hazmat transport incident risks on roadways by examining commercial vehicle incident/accident reports maintained by Texas Department of Transportation, and HazMat incident reports, and using geographic information systems (GIS) to identify risk ‘hotspots.’  Examining safety management practices of transportation carriers and how these practices affect vehicle maintenance and incident risks.  Evaluating population demographics and HazMat transport corridor proximity using U.S. Census microdata and GIS.  Analyzing effects of infrastructures (roadways and buildings) on potential toxic plume migrations or explosive blasts in the urbanized areas.  Evaluating how information about HazMat transportation is integrated into emergency, transportation, and community plans. For example, addressing responses of vulnerable populations to emergency warning notifications, and ways of effectively communicating risks to those populations.  Researching horizontal and vertical communications and information sharing practices among local, state, and federal agencies, and the private sector. For example, sharing of U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) e-manifest data with local and state agencies, or on effective and efficient sharing of data from electronic tracking of HazMat shipments while addressing privacy and security concerns.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 2 1 PURPOSE AND OVERVIEW

The purpose of this project was to provide information about the specific nature of HazMat shipments in the El Paso area that can be used to enhance HazMat transport incident planning, preparedness, and response, as well as environmental hazards assessments. A hazardous materials shipment analysis is one type of study that can provide this type of information. The types of information that can be collected include specific hazardous material names, quantities, and packaging configurations, and shipment origin/destination.

A community can use information about hazardous materials transportation as part of emergency preparedness and response plans. These plans help guide incident response training activities, identify risk hotspots, evaluate equipment and supplies resources and needs, develop warning systems (e.g., evacuation or shelter-in-place), locate resources and schedule personnel, or evaluate HazMat route designations. Information can also be used to support comprehensive community planning (transportation, emergency services, environmental, land use, etc.) and, infrequently, legal takings. More ideas about how information from this study can be used are provided in a report for 2012 El Paso Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Study (HMCFS) project1 that was conducted by TTI for the El Paso Local Emergency Planning Committee and Texas Division of Emergency Management.

Chapter 2 of this report provides an overview of the El Paso border region, including manufacturing facilities and transportation infrastructures in Juarez, Mexico, and El Paso, Texas. Chapter 3 describes results from prior studies on cross-border HazMat movements between Juarez and El Paso, conducted for U.S. EPA in 1998 and 2004. Chapter 4 reviews the project tasks, including descriptions of data collection locations and procedures. Chapter 5 presents results from truck traffic and shipping manifest surveys that were conducted for the present study at the Zaragoza Port of Entry in El Paso. Chapter 6 describes results from truck traffic and shipping manifest surveys that were conducted for this study at the Anthony, New Mexico, Port of Entry on I-10. Chapter 7 provides conclusions of this study, suggestions for using the information for emergency response and community planning, and recommendations for future research.

1 HMCFS projects identify the types and amounts of hazardous materials that are transported into, out of, within, and through a specific area. Typically data collected for an HMCFS are at a broader range of locations but a coarser level of information (e.g., truck type and identification of hazardous materials placards) than are collected in a shipping manifest study. An HMCFS for the El Paso region was conducted in conjunction with the hazardous materials shipment analysis, with funding through the Texas Division of Emergency Management (TDEM).

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 3 2 EL PASO BORDER REGION

This chapter presents an overview of economic and transport activity in the El Paso border region, particularly in El Paso, Texas, and Ciudad Juarez, Mexico. It reviews land uses and identifies the locations of existing facilities that generate freight. The infrastructure serving to facilitate the movement of cargo is also discussed (roads, railroads, and airports).

2.1 CARGO GENERATORS

Industrial operations in the El Paso – Ciudad Juarez region are part of a complex intercontinental supply chain. In general terms, cross-border traffic between the U.S. and Mexico in El Paso supports mainly third-party logistics (3PLs) operations, i.e., warehousing, distribution, and supplying raw materials or work-in-process inventory coming from North America, Asia, Europe, Mexico, and South America to the maquiladoras in Ciudad Juarez—the manufacturing base. Work-in-process and finished products come back to El Paso for warehousing and further distribution inside the U.S.

Most industrial operations in Ciudad Juarez are located near the Bridge of the Americas (BOTA) and Ysleta-Zaragoza Ports of Entry (POE), toward the eastern side of both Juarez and El Paso (Figure 1). The industrial developments on the west side of the region are less extensive (concentrated close to the Santa Teresa, New Mexico, POE). Recently, the Union Pacific Railroad announced the construction of an all-new rail facility in Santa Teresa, which might attract industrial and manufacturing facilities that are seeking to relocate to Juarez or El Paso (1) and could potentially impact freight volumes in this area in the future.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 4

Figure 1. Location of Potential Freight Generators in El Paso-Ciudad Juarez Binational Region (Map by Texas A&M Transportation Institute Using GIS Data from Regional Geospatial Service Center, University of Texas at El Paso).

According to Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (INEGI) (2), the population in Ciudad Juarez was over 1.33 million habitants and employment of nearly 500,000 jobs in 2010, making it the largest metropolitan region in the Texas-Mexico border. Maquiladoras receive most of their raw materials and work-in-process inventories through El Paso POEs. The Ciudad Juarez manufacturing base consists of approximately 345 plants distributed in 39 industrial zones, as illustrated in Figure 2. According to a model from the Dallas Federal Reserve that tracks Juarez maquiladora employment since 2006, in 2011 Juarez maquiladora employment increased at a 5.5 percent rate, equivalent to almost 12,000 new jobs (3). Freight typically produced at these plants include automotive parts, computers, refrigerators and ovens, medical products assemblies, and more recently wind blades, efficiency engines and turbines for airplanes and power generation. Increasing production in Ciudad Juarez manufacturing base is expected to result in more freight activity on both sides of the border.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 5

Figure 2. Location of Industrial Parks and Maquiladoras in Ciudad Juarez (Map by Texas A&M Transportation Institute Using GIS Data from Regional Geospatial Service Center, University of Texas at El Paso).

El Paso is the largest city on the Texas-Mexico border by population and employment: with 652,113 habitants and 253,938 jobs in 2010 (4). The transportation infrastructure in El Paso is not only critical for the movement of people and freight, but also for the vitality of the overall U.S.-Mexico trade. In 2009, for example, the total U.S.-Mexico trade was $306 billion, from which 70 percent took place through Texas’ transportation network (including its POEs) and 16 percent took place through El Paso—using trucks as the predominant mode. El Paso is one of the most important POEs for the U.S. (5).

The combination of increasing fuel prices, structural changes in the supply chain operations, and a more mature cargo market in the region are expected to impact cargo demand. Because of the impacts of the 2007 recession, manufacturing plants in Ciudad Juarez are still operating

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 6 below capacity. However, recent trends of some plants relocating near the U.S.-Mexico border (nearshoring) might translate in an increase of demand for the movement of freight between El Paso and Ciudad Juarez in the medium term.

2.2 CARGO TRANSPORT INFRASTRUCTURE

2.2.1 Roadways

El Paso is the second-largest truck POE in Texas, with two commercial border crossings (Ysleta-Zaragoza POE and Bridge of the Americas POE) that processed over 714,000 trucks entering to the U.S. in 2011—around 20 percent of northbound traffic entering Texas. I-10, U.S. 54, and U.S. 62/180 are major corridors that connect El Paso with U.S. hinterlands and carry thousands of cars and trucks through the El Paso metropolitan area; furthermore, these are the only reasonably efficient routes along the southern border of the U.S. that provided connectivity between the East Coast and West Coast, for example, between Atlanta and Los Angeles. Other important roadways for cargo transport in the area are listed in Table 1.

Table 1. Existing Truck Routes and HazMat Cargo Routes in El Paso. Truck Routes Hazmat Routes I-10 I-10 US 54 Loop 375 Spur 601 US 54 Global Reach Rd. Railroad Dr. US 62/Montana Ave. Fred Wilson Ave. Airway Blvd. Trowbridge Ave TX 20 Delta Dr. FM 1281 Airway Blvd FM 76 US 62/Montana Ave. FM 2316 Zaragoza Rd. Trowbridge Ave. Clark Dr. Artcraft Rd.

Source: Regional Geospatial Service Center, University of Texas at El Paso.

Within the El Paso area, TX (Loop) 375 carries substantial truck volumes south of US 62/180. Spur 601 is another recent corridor that is intended to improve the mobility in east- central El Paso. Combined with the POEs, these roadways provide critically important links in the overall U.S.-Mexico supply-chain. Given the location of warehousing and manufacturing facilities in the El-Paso-Juarez region, these routes currently provide the most-viable economic options for cargo transport. The roadway infrastructure serving cargo traffic, including movement of hazardous materials, is illustrated in Figure 3.

El Paso is developing additional capacity to alleviate truck traffic. Construction is already taking place to provide a four-lane divided arterial on the Loop 375 from I-10 to the Franklin Mountains State Park in western El Paso, and two direct connectors to I-10. TxDOT is rehabilitating four existing lanes and create two managed toll lanes in the center the section of Loop 375 known as the César Chávez Border Highway along the U.S.-Mexico border in southern El Paso from US 54 to S. Zaragoza Road (6). A second project on Loop 375 from S.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 7 Zaragoza Road to I-10 includes the addition of two express toll lanes, one lane in each direction. Existing access points to Loop 375 are located at S. Zaragoza Road, FM 258 (Socorro Road), FM 76 (North Loop Drive), and I-10 (7). The managed lanes would be located inside of the existing lanes. These two projects are will increase accessibility to and from the BOTA and Ysleta-Zaragoza POEs.

Figure 3. Existing Truck Routes and HazMat Cargo Routes in El Paso, and Major Arterials in Ciudad Juarez (Map by Texas A&M Transportation Institute Using GIS Data from Regional Geospatial Service Center, University of Texas at El Paso).

Several long-term projects included in the Mission 2035 Metropolitan Transportation Plan (MTP) for El Paso could also impact the levels truck traffic, although to a lesser extent than the improvements discussed above. These include: the Ysleta-Zaragoza POE commercial lane improvements; the Guadalupe-Tornillo POE; the Santa Teresa POE Intelligent Transportation System improvements; the Santa Teresa intermodal rail station; and railroad overpasses as well as truck road infrastructure (8). In March 2005, El Paso County received a Presidential Permit

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 8 for the construction of a new POE (Tornillo/Guadalupe) at Fabens. The plans call for a POE that is 1,274 feet long and 94 feet wide, and have six vehicular lanes and two pedestrian crossings. El Paso County will obtain 270 acres of adjacent vacant land to support the development. This facility could represent a viable alternative route for trucks in the long run as new industrial developments take place near this POE.

The 2009 Regional Development Plan of Ciudad Juarez incorporates several urban areas that already consider future land uses and the type of activities that will be allowed (9). Some portions of these zones are already part of the city limits of Juarez; nonetheless, they have received special treatment as areas of urban growth adding up to more than 19,205 hectares. This implies that growth will be directed toward the south-eastern side of Ciudad Juarez, and it will be restricted to the west, with exception of the San Jeronimo reserve already approved very near to the Santa Teresa-San Jeronimo POE; growth along the Carretera Casas Grandes highway will be also restricted.

2.2.2 Railways

Most of the Class I railroad trackage in the El Paso area is owned by Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR). Figure 4 illustrates the El Paso railroad transportation network, including UPRR’s Lordsburg and Valentine Subdivisions, which are part of the Sunset Route, which runs between the Los Angeles, California, area and New Orleans, Louisiana, and the UPRR Carrizozo Subdivision, which is part of the Tucumcari Line, which runs between El Paso, Texas, and Topeka, Kansas.

Figure 4 also shows the BNSF El Paso Subdivision, which runs between El Paso, Texas, and Isleta, New Mexico. The BNSF also has ‘trackage rights’ over UPRR’s Sunset Line between El Paso and Sierra Blanca, Texas. However, BNSF has indicated they seldom exercise trackage rights over this segment and was not aware of such HazMat traffic in 2011.

Both UPRR and BNSF interchange with Mexican railroad Ferromex at the U.S.-Mexico border, also indicated on Figure 4. While most of BNSF’s traffic is international, with some origination and termination in El Paso, UPRR traffic consists of cross-country (U.S.) and international movements, as well as origination and termination in El Paso. UPRR operates four railyards in the El Paso area, and BNSF operates one railyard. These yards serve primarily as interchanges for the railway network connections and local cargo deliveries. However, the railyards also handle transloading of intermodal shipments between truck and rail. These shipments are transported by truck across the U.S.-Mexico border.2

2 Much of the information in Section 2.2.2 was taken from the following report: Bierling, D., Jasek, D., Martin, M., Cutaia, L., Lorente, P., & Van Alstyne, M. (2012, September). Hazardous materials commodity flow study: Railways in El Paso County, Texas. Prepared for the Texas Division of Emergency Management and the El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee. Texas A&M Transportation Institute.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 9

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Figure 4. El Paso Rail Network. (Source: http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/rail/freight/el_paso.pdf)

Page

10

Further general information about rail operations in the El Paso area can be found in the 2011 El Paso Region Freight Rail Study, prepared by HNTB for the Texas Department of Transportation, and available at http://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot-info/rail/freight/el_paso.pdf.

2.2.3 Airports

El Paso International Airport (EPIA) has the most extensive facilities of all the airports that are located within 50 miles from the border with Mexico in Texas and New Mexico. The airport also serves as a gateway for West Texas, southern New Mexico, and northern Mexico. This 288,000 ft2 air cargo complex is centered in the Butterfield Trail Industrial Park, tailored to the “just-in-time” nature of U.S.-Mexico trade. The $60 million dollar facility accommodates four air cargo carriers: DB Schenker, DHL, FedEx, and United Parcel Services (10). The Foreign Trade Zone (FTZ) No. 68 Office consists of 21 sites containing 3,443 acres within El Paso County. The City of El Paso is the grantee and operator of the FTZ No.68 under the EPIA. FTZ No.68 provides special customs procedures reducing transaction costs for U.S. companies engaged in international commerce (11).

The Abraham González International Airport (AGIA) in Ciudad Juarez is one of the few airports on the Mexican side of the US-Mexico border that have facilities for cargo handling. Grupo Aeroportuario Centro Norte operates a subsidiary called OMA Carga, which has warehouse space at Ciudad Juarez. OMA’s cargo facilities at AGIA, which are operated by Estafeta and Jett Paquetería, consist of 5,382 square feet with 6 inspection platforms, a confiscation platform, customs office, and X-Ray area. AGIA has the most significant cargo volumes of the Mexican airports on the border—handling an average of 2,841 cargo tons per year, with a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of −3.24 percent from 2006 to 2011. In the last decade, Mexico has been making significant efforts to promote the development of the aerospace industry. As of 2011, there is a significant presence of aerospace industries in the four Mexican states sharing the border with Texas (e.g., in Chihuahua: Cessna, Zodiac Aerospace, Nordam) (12).

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 11

3 PREVIOUS HAZMAT TRANSPORT STUDIES

Typically, little information is available to local emergency planners about hazardous materials (HazMat) shipments in their jurisdictions unless a local hazardous materials commodity flow study (HMCFS) or similar type of analysis is conducted. Regarding cross- border flows of HazMat, U.S. Customs and Border Protection data are restricted to other federal agencies (this issue is addressed in Chapter 7), and obtaining permission for other entities to use these data is time-consuming and the outcome uncertain. National commodity flow data are not applicable locally or for specific commodities. Private data are closely guarded by shippers and carriers, and data from private firms are costly and of limited specification.

Our initial expectation based on research of available Internet sources was that there was limited recent information available to local entities about the specific nature of HazMat shipments over trans-border and other corridors in El Paso. However, reports that were provided by U.S. EPA Region 6 office during the project, via the Border Liaison Office in El Paso, indicate that two cross-border HazMat transport studies were previously conducted in El Paso, one study published in 1998 (13) and the other published in 2004 (14). The results of these studies that are relevant to this research are presented below.

3.1 HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMODITY FLOW STUDY (1998)

The 1998 study (13) describes the bridge crossing at Zaragoza POE as the site selected for traffic survey “since it is the principal location for truck transportation across the border with Mexico and is the principal hazardous and non-hazardous transportation route in the area” (p. 17). Surveys for the 1998 study were conducted from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. from February 3 through 6, 1997, and from 9 a.m. to 6 p.m. on February 7, 1997. The surveys resulted in driver interviews/inspections of 387 trucks, of which 326 trucks were transporting hazmat. Of the hazmat trucks, 207 were empty and 119 were “full” (sic, interpreted to mean loaded). Table 2 describes the truck types reported from the 1997 survey.

Table 2. Truck Types and Counts Included in 1997 Cross-Border HazMat Survey. Truck Type Count Container 1 Dump 2 Flatbed 6 Hopper (cement) 1 Single trailer 20 Straight 22 Tanker 335 Total 387

The report describes that of the 119 trucks that were reported as carrying hazmat, 85 had appropriate papers, and 33 had incomplete papers or no papers. Table 3 describes whether trucks from the 1997 survey were classified as full or empty, based on information summarized in the 1998 report.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 12

Table 3. HazMat Commodities and Truck Loadings in 1997 Cross-Border HazMat Survey. HazMat Commodity Number of Full Trucks Number of Empty Trucks Propane 50 126 Diesel 35 58 Fuel 7 16 Liquid nitrogen 6 5 Remaining substances* 21 3 Total 119 208** * 1998 report describes remaining substances as trucks that “were carrying, or had carried such substances as volatile liquids, lead, mercury, spent paint sludge, and liquid hydrogen.” ** There is a small discrepancy between totals reported in different parts of the 1998 report.

The report notes that 16 percent of the trucks carrying hazardous materials had incorrect placards or no placards at all. It is not clear from the report whether trucks with no placards were actually required to display placards, or were exempt from placarding requirements because the quantities of hazardous materials they were transporting were below threshold levels.

The 1998 report discusses condition of trucks in the survey, based on inspections done by survey team members regarding overall truck condition, including tires, containers, windshields, fire extinguishers, braking systems, and lighting systems. It describes that 14 trucks were in excellent condition, 283 trucks in good condition, 88 trucks in fair condition, and 2 trucks in poor condition. The report notes the lack of correlation between truck condition and cargo type. However, it also does not indicate truck condition according to whether the truck was inbound or outbound, does not indicate specific scoring methods or criteria that were used in assigning truck conditions, or whether different personnel were responsible for scoring vehicles.

The 1998 study also tabulated accidental spill histories from both fixed and mobile sources. Mobile source data are presumed to be from the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission (TNRCC), the forerunner to the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), and fixed source data (not shown here) are presumed to be from the U.S. EPA’s Emergency Release Notification System. The reported accidental spill histories from the 1998 report are summarized for transportation sources in Table 4.

Table 4. Spill Histories by Transport Source in 1998 Cross-Border HazMat Study Report. Transportation Source 1994 1995 1996 Rail 10 15 9 Pipeline 0 72 42 Highway vehicle 2 18 14 Total 12 105 65

The 1998 report includes a review of traffic accidents for all types of roadway traffic accidents in El Paso, including passenger vehicles. The report identifies I-10 in the vicinity of Airway Blvd. as a primary accident location, as well as traffic on Montana Avenue, to the south of the airport, westbound I-10 at Executive Drive, southbound US 54 and Fred Wilson Ave. (TX 601), and the intersection of Zaragoza Rd. and Americas Blvd. (TX 375).

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 13

3.2 TRANSBOUNDARY HAZARDOUS MATERIALS COMMODITY FLOW SURVEY (2004)

The 2004 report (14) describes the results of a truck traffic survey at the Zaragoza POE, which was conducted from March 15–19, 2004. The hours over which the survey took place were not reported in the main body of the report. The report describes that of the 6,155 total inbound and outbound loads, 371 or around 6 percent were reported as carrying or equipped to carry hazmat loads. Of outbound trucks, 211 were carrying or equipped to carry hazmat, reported as 6.8 percent of total outbound traffic. This means that there were a total of approximately 3,100 outbound trucks during the survey period, and correspondingly a total of around 3,055 inbound trucks during the survey period.

With inbound hazmat traffic thus totaling 160 trucks (derived from 371 trucks minus 211 trucks), this corresponds to around 5.2 percent of inbound trucks carrying or equipped to carry hazmat. Table 5 summarizes the top transported, placarded commodities for inbound and outbound traffic at Zaragoza POE during the March 15–19, 2004, survey, based on information presented in the report. We interpret discrepancies between numbers of hazmat trucks described above and reported in Table 5 as being due to numbers of trucks that are ‘carrying or equipped to carry’ hazardous materials versus placarded loads or placarded commodities, multiple placards on some trucks, and/or other reasons.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 14

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 5. Major Transported, Placarded Commodities by Number of Truckloads for Inbound and Outbound Trucks at Zaragoza Bridge as Reported for March 15–19, 2004, Survey. A&M Inbound Trucks Outbound Trucks

Transportation Institute Transportation Commodity (Class or UN/NA ID) # Loads Rank # Loads Rank LPG; Propane (1075) 78 1 127 1 Miscellaneous dangerous goods (Cl. 9) 34 2 7 6 Elevated temp. liquids, n.o.s., at or above 100 C and 25 3 23 3 below its flash point; Asphalt (3257) Carbon dioxide, refrigerated liquid (2187) 9 4 6 7 Flammable and combustible liquids (Cl. 3) 7 5.5 13 4.5 Corrosive materials (Cl. 8) 7 5.5 5 8

Flammable gases (Cl. 2) 4 7 95 2 Environmentally hazardous substances (3082) 3 8.5 N/A* Flammable solids; Spontaneously combustible 3 8.5 N/A materials; Dangerous when wet materials (Cl. 4) Nitriles, poisonous, flammable, n.o.s. (3276) 2 10 Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (1977) N/A 13 4.5 Argon, refrigerated liquid (1951) N/A 4 9

* N/A = not available in report.

Page

15

The 2004 report also discusses condition of trucks in the survey, based on inspections done by survey team members with the assistance of U.S. Customs and Border Protection Service. A survey form (which was reported to be provided in an appendix that was not available for review) was used to indicate a condition rating based on “a cursory inspection of the overall condition of the transports” (p. 9). The report describes that inbound traffic “was subject to a complete inspection” but that outbound traffic “could not be stopped for such an inspection, though placards were noted as well as other information that could be obtained visually” (p. 10). Table 6 summarizes the results of the inspections based on information contained in the report.

Table 6. Truck Condition by Direction as Reported in 2004 Transboundary Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Survey Report. Direction/Condition Excellent Good Fair/Poor Total Inbound 17 125 18* 160 Outbound 8 197 6** 211 Total 25 322 24 371 * Only one truck in this category was rated as “Poor,” all other trucks were rated as “Fair.” **All trucks in this category were rated as “Fair.”

What might at first appear to be a statistically higher number of trucks rated as “Excellent” or “Fair/Poor” for inbound trucks, and a statistically higher number of trucks rated as “Good” for outbound trucks, must be regarded as inconclusive upon further consideration (it also should be noted that the 2004 report does not attempt to make such comparisons). First, no indication is given as to whether the same personnel were involved in rating the inbound and outbound trucks. Second, the methods by which inbound and outbound trucks were rated are different. Information in the report suggests that inbound trucks were subject to detailed inspections, while outbound trucks were subject to only a cursory visual review, which took place while trucks were not stopped for an actual inspection.

The lack of ability to physically inspect outbound vehicles may therefore have led to an inability to distinguish across differences in vehicle conditions, resulting in a greater number of moderate (“Good”) ratings for outbound vehicles, and fewer ratings on the extremes. For similar reasons, comparison of safety ratings of inbound traffic from the 2004 report and the 1998 report are inconclusive, as there is no ability to determine consistency in the personnel, procedures, and criteria that were used in assigning ratings in the respective surveys.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 16

4 PROJECT TASKS

This chapter describes the different project tasks for the 2012 shipping manifest study project in the El Paso area.

4.1 KICKOFF MEETINGS

Task 1 was to hold kickoff meetings with key stakeholders in the El Paso area to brief them about the project’s objectives and receive input on the methods and activities. Stakeholder groups included the El Paso Fire Department (representing El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee), Texas Department of Public Safety – Commercial Vehicle Enforcement (CVE), New Mexico Department of Public Safety - Motor Transport Police (MTP), Doña Ana County Local Emergency Planning Committee (including different local, state, and federal and private representatives), and U.S. EPA.

4.2 COORDINATE DATA COLLECTION

Task 2 was to coordinate data collection. This included meetings with Texas Department of Public Safety – Commercial Vehicle Enforcement (CVE) Division staff regarding data collection at the Ysleta-Zaragoza International POE, hereafter referred to as the Zaragoza POE, on the Juarez-El Paso border, and with New Mexico Department of Public Safety - Motor Transport Police (MTP) regarding data collection at the Anthony Port of Entry near the Texas-New Mexico Border. We also developed a Project Safety Plan, reviewed previously-developed data collection instruments, documentation, and analysis procedures, and developed additional aids for data collection. A graduate student from the University of Texas at El Paso Department of Civil Engineering was also hired to assist with the project.

4.2.1 Zaragoza POE

The Zaragoza POE is one of three gateways for truck traffic between the El Paso region and Juarez, Mexico. Other gateways are the Bridge of the Americas between El Paso and Ciudad Juarez in south-central El Paso, and the Santa Theresa Port of Entry between Santa Theresa, New Mexico, and Jeronimo, Mexico, to the west of El Paso. Of the three, hazardous materials shipments are currently permitted only through the Zaragoza POE, although HazMat shipments through Santa Theresa are also being considered for the future.

There are two inspection stations for northbound (inbound) truck traffic at the Zaragoza POE. The first is a federal facility through which shipments must clear U.S. Customs and may be subject to inspections by U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, and other federal agencies. After passing through the federal facility, trucks must proceed through a state facility that is owned by the Texas Department of Transportation and operated by Texas Department of Public Safety (DPS), Texas Highway Patrol Commercial Vehicle Enforcement (CVE) Division at which trucks may be inspected for vehicle safety. Data for this project were collected at the DPS facility. Figure 5 shows the general location of the Texas DPS Zaragoza POE facility in South El Paso.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 17

4.2.2 Anthony POE

The Anthony, New Mexico Port of Entry, hereafter referred to as the Anthony POE, is a covered, fixed inspection and permitting facility located on Westbound I-10 approximately 4.5 miles north of the Texas-New Mexico border. This facility is operated by the New Mexico Motor Transport Police (MTP) and serves truck traffic entering New Mexico from Texas. There are also two uncovered scales in Texas that are operated intermittently by Texas DPS to the south of the Texas-New Mexico border. Data were collected for this project at the Anthony POE facility given that the facility is open and staffed 24-hours a day and offered protection from extreme weather conditions. Figure 6 shows the general location of the New Mexico MTP Anthony POE, to the northwest of El Paso.

4.3 COLLECT DATA

HazMat shipping manifest data were collected by TTI personnel at both Zaragoza POE and Anthony POE in April, May, and June 2012. Local agencies were also invited to participate in data collection. While there was not local agency participation in actual data collection, local emergency responders and emergency planners associated with Doña Ana County LEPC met with MTP staff at the Anthony POE to discuss MTP operations and HazMat transport by truck over area roadways.

Equipment and supplies used for the data collection included safety vests, steel toe boots, sun block, drinking water, pens, a digital video camera provided by TTI’s El Paso Office and video tape, digital photo camera, clipboards, and data sheets. The overall data collection procedure relied on prescreening trucks for presence of hazardous materials in the shipments, and then collecting shipment document information from trucks that were identified as having or potentially having hazardous materials during the prescreening process.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 18

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 5. Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry in South El Paso, Texas (Image Created Using Google Earth; Image Source Is INEGI).

19

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 6. New Mexico MTP Anthony Port of Entry to the Northwest of El Paso, Texas (Image Created Using Google Earth; Image Sources Are Digital Globe and GeoEye).

20

4.3.1 Zaragoza POE

At the Zaragoza POE, prescreening trucks for hazardous materials was done by TTI personnel with assistance from Texas DMV inspectors and Texas Highway Patrol CVE Troopers. The prescreening consisted of observing hazardous materials placards on trucks, and/or asking truck drivers (in Spanish) about shipment contents, and occasionally examining shipping documents. The Zaragoza POE prescreening location is shown on Figure 7 as the “Truck/Survey Identifier Location.” Figure 8 shows a data collector conducting prescreening trucks for hazardous materials. At Zaragoza POE the types and configurations of trucks passing through the facilities during data collection were also recorded by videotaping of the truck traffic passing through the facility. The video tapes were later reviewed, and truck types/configurations and presence of HazMat placards were recorded during data processing.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 21

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 7. Truck Screening and Shipping Manifest Surveyor Locations at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry (Image Created Using Google Earth; Image Source Is INEGI).

22

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Figure 8. Screening Trucks for Shipping Manifest Data Collection at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry

Page (Photo by Texas A&M Transportation Institute).

23

After the prescreening process, trucks that were identified as carrying any hazardous materials were directed to a location at which hazardous materials shipment data were collected through examination of shipping documents and asking fact-based questions of drivers. Our goal was to collect hazardous materials shipment data within five minutes or less. For complex shipments, images were recorded of shipping documents and transcribed later. The shipment data collection location is also shown on Figure 7 as the “Truck/Manifest Surveyor Location.” Both the prescreening and shipment data collection locations were selected based on input from CVE Supervisors to maximize safety of data collectors, truck drivers, and facility personnel, provide access to trucks, ensure safety of truck drivers and facility personnel, and efficiency of facility operations.

Collected shipping manifest data included but were not limited to:  General information: o Name of data recorder. o Location of data collection. o Day, date, and time of data collection.  Truck information (as observed by data recorder): o Truck configuration, body type, and number of axles. o Cargo tank type (as applicable). o US DOT registration number. o UN/NA placard IDs and placard location on trucks.  Load information (from drivers and manifest sheets): o Direction of travel. o Load origin. o Load destination.  HazMat shipment information (from manifest sheets): o Commodity name. o Commodity UN/NA number. o Commodity origin. o Commodity destination. o Commodity amount. o Commodity packaging configuration. o Empty backhaul indicator (if truck was returning empty after delivery).

Figure 9 shows a data collector collecting truck and hazardous materials shipment information at Zaragoza POE.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 24

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Figure 9. Collecting Shipping Manifest Data at Texas DPS CVE Zaragoza Port of Entry Page (Photo by Texas A&M Transportation Institute).

25

After a trial data collection effort in February 2012, the first round of data collection at the Zaragoza POE took place on April 3 between approximately 11:00 a.m. and 4:30 p.m. and on April 4 between approximately 1:00 p.m. and 5:00 p.m. Video data collection equipment were assembled prior to data collection, and video tapes were changed approximately every two hours. Initially, we attempted to use a sign-board for prescreening, with basic questions in printed Spanish about whether their trucks were loaded or empty, and then for loaded trucks whether shipments contained hazardous materials. The text and symbols on the signs directed drivers to provide a ‘thumbs-up’ or ‘thumbs-down’ in response, as applicable. However, after this initial data collection effort it was determined that this method of prescreening was inefficient and was delaying the flow of truck traffic through the facility.

The second data collection at Zaragoza POE took place on May 16 between approximately 8:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m., and on May 18 between 2:00 p.m. and 6:00 p.m. During this data collection, truck drivers were asked verbally about truck and shipment content, and affirmative or negative responses for loaded/empty trucks were indicated by the prescreening personnel physically giving a thumbs-up (loaded) or thumbs-down (empty) gesture in view of video recording equipment.

The third data collection at Zaragoza POE took place on June 11 between approximately 1:30 p.m. and 7:00 p.m., on June 12 between approximately 8:30 a.m. and 3:00 p.m., and on June 14 between approximately 4:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. As with the second data collection, affirmative and negative responses to questions about loaded/empty trucks were indicated by prescreeners who indicated a thumbs-up or thumbs-down gesture in view of video recording equipment. During this data collection, we also expanded the prescreening process to ask drivers about the load contents and record their responses. We also intermittently examined shipping documents to verify information that was provided by the truck drivers. This was done to confirm the accuracy of driver reports about load contents, particularly with respect to hazardous materials. In no cases were driver reports about hazardous materials content inconsistent with the information provided on shipping manifests.

4.3.2 Anthony POE

At the Anthony POE, prescreening trucks for hazardous materials was done by New Mexico Motor Vehicle Division inspectors by observing hazardous materials placards on trucks and/or asking truck drivers about shipment contents (presence of hazardous materials). Only trucks that passed through the inspection station were screened. Since a substantial portion of trucks did not pass through the inspection station because they have PrePass clearance, only a portion of the trucks were able to be prescreened. The Anthony POE prescreening location is shown on Figure 10 as the “Truck/Survey Identifier Location.” Figure 11 shows a queue of trucks passing through the Anthony POE for HazMat cargo prescreening.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 26

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 10. Truck Screening and Shipping Manifest Surveyor Locations at Anthony POE (Image Created Using Google Earth; Image Source Is INEGI).

27

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 11. Screening Trucks for Shipping Manifest Data Collection at Anthony POE (Photo by Texas A&M Transportation Institute).

28

Whereas the types and configurations of trucks, as well as indications of whether trucks were loaded or empty were recorded on video tape at Zaragoza POE for later transcription, the types and configurations of trucks at Anthony POE were manually recorded on data sheets at the time of data collection. This included trucks that passed through the Anthony POE facility as well as trucks that did not enter the facility (presuming PrePass clearance). However, we were not able to identify whether trucks were loaded or empty at Anthony POE unless they were directed for HazMat shipping manifest data collection through the prescreening process.

Trucks that were identified by MTP in the prescreening process as being placarded or potentially carrying hazardous materials at the Anthony POE were directed to a secondary location at which hazardous materials shipment data were collected. As with data collection at Zaragoza POE, our goal here was also to collect hazardous materials shipment data within five minutes or less, and for complex shipments images were recorded of shipping documents and transcribed later. The shipment data collection location at the Anthony POE is shown on Figure 11 as the “Truck/Manifest Surveyor Location.” Both the prescreening and shipment data collection locations were selected based on input from MTP Supervisors to maximize safety of data collectors and access to truck drivers, as well as ensure safety of truck drivers and facility personnel, and efficiency of facility operations.

The first round of data collection at the Anthony POE took place on April 5 between approximately 9:00 a.m. and 10:00 a.m. The second round of data collection at the Anthony POE took place on May 15 between approximately 7:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. and on May 17 between approximately 10:30 a.m. and 4:00 p.m. The third round of data collection took place on June 13 between approximately 5:00 a.m. and 12:00 p.m. MTP staff did attempt to bring all HazMat trucks in through the Anthony POE for a short time during the morning of June 13, however, this created a substantial congestion problem at the port and was soon discontinued. The same categories of shipping manifest data were collected at Anthony POE as are described above for Zaragoza POE.

4.4 PROCESS DATA

Video data from data collection at the Zaragoza POE was visually reviewed to identify truck type and configuration, presence of hazardous materials placards, and indications whether trucks were loaded or empty. These data, along with handwritten data from hazardous materials manifest survey sheets, and handwritten data on truck type and configuration and presence of hazardous materials placards, were entered into MS Excel and MS Access files. Data were quality checked for consistency of data entry. Two undergraduate students from Texas A&M University’s Department of Landscape Architecture and Urban Planning were hired to assist with data processing and analysis.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 29

4.5 ANALYZE DATA

The data were analyzed for important metrics related to hazardous materials transportation. These metrics include:  Truck traffic patterns by time of day.  HazMat traffic patterns by time of day.  Classification of observed hazardous material placards by: o Specific UN/NA ID. o Hazardous material class/division. o Configuration and type of truck.  Classification of hazardous material shipments by: o Locations of origin and destination. o Specific hazardous materials transported associated with UN/NA placard identifiers on vehicles. o Shipment quantities, packaging, and transport configurations. o Placarded versus non-placarded loads. o Carrier (company) safety and compliance information.

Results of the data analysis are presented in Chapters 3 and 4 of this report.

4.6 DOCUMENT RESULTS

This report documents the results of the research, including research methods and findings. Funding for this project also served as in-kind matching funds for a hazardous materials commodity flow study that was conducted by TTI for the El Paso Metropolitan area and the I-10 Corridor between El Paso and San Antonio, Texas. The HMCFS project was funded through the Hazardous Materials Emergency Management (HMEP) Grant Program, administered in Texas by the Texas Division of Emergency Management. HMCFS project reports were distributed separately to the respective Texas LEPCs in October 2012.

4.7 PRESENT RESULTS

Preliminary results of this project were presented to personnel from El Paso Fire Department, Texas Department of Public Safety CVE Division, New Mexico MTP, and U.S. EPA in September 2012, and to Doña Ana County LEPC members in October 2012.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 30

5 2012 ZARAGOZA POE HAZMAT SURVEY RESULTS

This chapter describes results of truck traffic and shipping manifest surveys at Zaragoza POE.

5.1 VIDEO DATA ANALYSIS

Video-tapes of truck traffic at Zaragoza POE were examined to identify truck and hazmat traffic patterns.3 The data were entered into a Microsoft Excel spreadsheet and analyzed. The spreadsheet calculations require 30-minute segments of data. Because the actual video-recorded data does not exactly correspond with 30-minute segments, some data trimming was required. That is, sometimes available video data were separated by a short time period, (e.g., a few minutes to change tapes). In three instances, data from two adjacent timeperiods, which together total 30 minutes were spliced together, and are interpreted as representing a single 30-minute timeperiod, provided they represent the same hour of day. Any splicing or trimming of data was done in a non-biased manner to avoid misrepresentation of observed truck or HazMat traffic levels. The dates and times for which this was done are indicated in Table 7 below, which lists hours of data that were included in the analysis spreadsheet.

Table 7. Hours of Video-Recorded Data included in Zaragoza POE Traffic Evaluation.

Hour of Hours of Video Data, by Date Day 2/8 4/3 4/4 5/16 5/18 6/11 6/12 6/14 Total 8 0.5 0.5

9 1.0 1.0 2.0

10 1.0* 0.5 1.5

11 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.5

12 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5

13 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5* 1.0 0.5 1.0 4.5

14 1.0 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 1.0 0.5 6.0

15 1.0 1.0* 1.0 1.0 1.0 5.0

16 0.5 0.5 1.0 1.0 1.0 4.0

17 1.0 0.5 1.5

18 0.5 0.5 1.0

19 1.0 1.0

Total 2.0 3.5 3.0 6.0 5.5 4.0 5.0 3.0 32.0 * includes spliced data from adjacent timeperiod.

3 We also augmented these data with observations of truck traffic through the Zaragoza POE that were conducted in addition to video data collection.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 31

The following figures and tables were developed using the video data in the analysis spreadsheet for the dates and times listed in Table 7.  Figure 12 shows a chart of total inbound truck traffic levels at Zaragoza POE. Truck traffic levels suggest a decreasing trend during the day, on the dates and times that data were collected.  Figure 13 shows a chart of the proportions of inbound truck traffic types, by hour of day. Box trucks were the predominant configuration at all times of day, with a generally increasing trend, on the dates and times that data were collected.  Figure 14 shows a chart of the proportions of inbound trucks observed with HazMat placards at Zaragoza POE, by hour of day. Percentages of placarded trucks ranged between 2 and 6 percent during the daytime. Truck traffic past 7 p.m. was only recorded on one day, with no recorded HazMat trucks. This level is consistent with information from POE personnel, who indicated that evening HazMat truck traffic is typically less than during the daytime.  Table 8 lists the overall proportions of truck traffic, by truck configuration and type, and the percentages of each truck configuration/type category with HazMat placards or markings. More than 83 percent of observed trucks were box van trucks, and most of these were tractor-trailer configurations. Around 2.5 percent of box trucks were placarded. Less than 3 percent of observed trucks were tank trucks, and nearly all of these were placarded.  Table 9 lists the number of placards by placard ID or classification that were observed on trucks in the recorded video for Zaragoza POE. The most-frequent UN/NA IDs observed in the video data were for UN/NA IDs 1075, 3268, and 3257/Hot. Note that the total number of placards observed was greater than the number of placarded trucks reported in Table 8, as some trucks displayed multiple placards.  Table 10 lists the number of placards by HazMat class that were observed on trucks in the recorded video.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 32

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Weekday Truck Traffic on NB Americas Ave, at Zaragoza Port of Entry, A&M El Paso, Texas

Transportation Institute Transportation 140

Northbound

120

Trendline (Northbound Traffic)

100 Notes

Truck Traffic:  955 NB trucks from 8 a.m.-5 p.m. 80 Truck and HazMat traffic estimates do

not reflect daily, weekly, or seasonal variations. Estimates use data 60 collected on the following dates in 2012: Feb. 8, Apr. 3-4, May 16, 18,

Jun. 11-12, 14. Number of Trucks (Avg.) Trucks of Number

40

20

0 August 2012 by 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 Hour of Day

Page Figure 12. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Observed Inbound Weekday Truck Traffic Levels.

33

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 13. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Truck Traffic by Truck Type.

34

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center

A&M

Transportation Institute Transportation

Page Figure 14. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Percentage of Inbound Placarded Truck Traffic.

35

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 8. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Weekday Inbound Truck Size and Type and HazMat Placard Observations. Number of Percent of A&M Truck Size Number of Percent of Total Trucks Observed Truck Size and Type

Transportation Institute Transportation and Type Trucks Observed Trucks Observed with HazMat Placard with HazMat Placard Straight 565 17.3% 4 0.7% Box 339 10.4% 3 0.9% Flatbed 4 0.1% 0 0.0% Other 220 6.7% 0 0.0% Refrigerated 1 0.0% 0 0.0%

Tank 1 0.0% 1 100.0% Tractor-Trailer 2,696 82.7% 128 4.7% Box 2,388 73.2% 44 1.8% Dry Tank 8 0.2% 0 0.0% Flatbed 103 3.2% 1 1.0%

Other 55 1.7% 0 0.0% Refrigerated 57 1.7% 0 0.0% Tank 85 2.6% 83 97.6% Grand Total 3,261 100.0% 132 4.0% Note: Includes data collected on Feb. 8, Apr. 3–4, May 16, 18, Jun. 11–12, 14.

Page

36

Table 9. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: HazMat Placard IDs. HazMat ID or Number of Placards Classification Commodity Description Recorded 1075 Liquefied petroleum gas; or other related gases† 52 1977 Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (cryogenic liquid) 6 2187 Carbon dioxide, refrigerated liquid 5 Class 2.3 or 6.1 “Inhalation hazard,” “Toxic,” or “Poison” placards 8 Other Class 2 UN/NA IDs 1046, 1070, 1951, 2037, and 3164, and 10 “Flammable gas” and “Non-flammable gas” placards

Class 3 UN/NA IDs 1203 and 1866, and “Flammable” placards 5 Class 4 UN NA ID 3170, and “Dangerous when wet” and 4 “Flammable solid” placards Class 8 UN/NA ID 1052 (has Class 6.1 as secondary classification), 8 and “Corrosive” placards 3082 Environmentally hazardous substances, hazardous waste, 3 or other regulated substances, liquid, n.o.s. 3257/Hot Elevated temperature liquid, n.o.s, at or above 100°C 10 (212°F), and below its flash point Class 9 Predominantly UN/NA ID 3268 (26 placards); also UN/NA 30 ID 3077 and general Class 9 placards Total 141 †Includes butane; butane mixture; butylene; isobutane; isobutane mixture; isobutylene; propane; propane mixture; and propylene.

Table 10. Zaragoza POE Video Count Data: Number of Placards by Primary HazMat Class/Division. Primary No. Placards Percent Placards Class/Division Observed Observed Class 2.1 54 38.3% Class 2.2 19 13.5% Class 2.3 or 6.1 8 5.7% Class 3 5 3.5% Class 4 4 2.8% Class 8 8 5.7% Class 9 43 30.5% Total 141 100%

5.2 SHIPPING MANIFEST DATA ANALYSIS

In addition to the video-recorded data described in Section 5.1, we collected data from shipping manifests of trucks passing through the Zaragoza POE. These data are described in a separate section because the shipping manifest data collection does not correspond exactly with the video data collection. In some cases, trucks that were recorded in the video data were not included in the shipping manifest data collection, and vice-versa.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 37

5.2.1 Shipment Types, Origins, and Destinations

Table 11 lists the placards that were observed on trucks that were included in the HazMat shipping manifest survey. Based on a comparison of the HazMat IDs for trucks included in the shipping manifest survey (Table 11) with the HazMat IDs for trucks included in the video data analysis (Table 9), the frequencies of commodity observations correspond to each other. (They should, as the data collection for the two samples generally but not completely overlaps.) This suggests that the shipping manifest data collection was not biased toward particular commodity types.

Table 11. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: HazMat Placard IDs on Inbound Trucks. HazMat ID or Number of Placards Classification Commodity Description Recorded 1075 Liquefied petroleum gas; or other related gases† 61 1977 Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (cryogenic liquid) 9 2187 Carbon dioxide, refrigerated liquid 5 Class 2.3 or 6.1 UN/NA ID 3306, and “Inhalation hazard”, “Toxic”, or 9 “Poison” placards Other Class 2 UN/NA IDs 1044, 1046, 1073, 1951, 2037, and 3164, and 12 “Flammable gas” and “Non-flammable gas” placards

Class 3 UN/NA ID 1866, and “Flammable” placards 5 Class 4 UN NA IDs 1436 and 3170, and “Dangerous when wet” and 4 “Flammable solid” placards Class 8 UN/NA ID 1052 (has Class 6.1 as secondary classification), 7 and “Corrosive” placards 3082 Environmentally hazardous substances, hazardous waste, 4 or other regulated substances, liquid, n.o.s. 3257/Hot Elevated temperature liquid, n.o.s, at or above 100°C 10 (212°F), and below its flash point Class 9 Predominantly UN/NA ID 3268 (37 placards); also UN/NA 45 IDs 2990 and 3077, and general Class 9 placards Total 171 †Includes butane; butane mixture; butylene; isobutane; isobutane mixture; isobutylene; propane; propane mixture; and propylene.

While placarded box truck traffic at Zaragoza POE was generally ‘loaded,’ e.g., carrying at least some hazardous materials, most of the tank trucks were ‘empty.’ That is to say, they were returning to the U.S. after having delivered their commodity loads to Mexico. We did not ascertain whether the trucks were completely cleaned of hazardous materials. This would not be the general practice, so we expect that even ‘empty’ tank trucks were carrying small or residual quantities of hazardous materials.

There were 100 tank trucks included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. Table 12 summarizes whether these tank were ‘Loaded’ or ‘Empty’ by placard/commodity number. Overall, 94 of the 100 trucks were empty, and 6 were loaded. Four of the six loaded trucks were carrying hydrofluoric acid (UN/NA ID 1052).

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 38

Table 12. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Tank Truck Loading Classifications. UN/NA ‘Loaded’ ‘Empty’ Placard ID Trucks Trucks Total Trucks 1046 1 1

1052 4 4

1073 1 1

1075 61 61

1866 4 4

1951 2 2

1977 10 10

2187 1 3 4 3082 3 3

3257 1 9 10 Total 6 94 100

The following tables provide information about placarding, truck configurations, transported quantities, load origins, load destinations, and whether the truck was loaded or empty for predominant types of HazMat shipments that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All data are for inbound shipments from Mexico into the U.S.  Table 13 lists observed placards, truck configurations, quantities, load origins and destinations, and truck loading for individual bulk shipments of hydrofluoric acid that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All of these trucks were loaded, and carried around 17 to 19 short tons of hydrofluoric acid.  Table 14 lists numbers of trucks, truck configurations, median quantities, and truck loading for bulk shipments by origins-destination pairings of liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) shipments that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All LPG trucks were empty, returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments to Mexico.  Table 15 lists number of trucks, truck configuration, median quantity, and truck loading for bulk shipments of refrigerated liquid nitrogen between Juarez, Mexico, and El Paso, Texas, that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All liquid nitrogen trucks were empty, returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments to Mexico.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 39

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 13. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Hydrofluoric Acid. A&M Primary Truck Quantity Placard ID Additional Placard IDs Configuration (lb) Load Origin Load Destination Loaded/Empty

Transportation Institut Transportation 1052 Poison; Inhalation hazard TT Tank 38,400 Juarez, CH El Paso, TX Loaded 1052 Poison; Inhalation hazard TT Tank 37,360 Juarez, CH Corpus Christi, TX Loaded 1052 Toxic; Inhalation hazard TT Tank 34,300 Juarez, CH Wilmington, CA Loaded 1052 Poison; Inhalation hazard TT Tank 34,319 Juarez, CH Houston, TX Loaded

e

Table 14. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Liquefied Petroleum Gas. Number of Median Placard ID Trucks Truck Configuration Quantity (gal) Load Origin Load Destination Loaded/Empty 1075 32 TT Tank 8,990a El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty 1075 1 TT Tank 9,220 Ozona, TX Juarez, CH Empty 1075 28 TT Tank 8,115b Sundown, TX Juarez, CH Empty

a. Based on data from 30 shipments. b. Based on data from 27 shipments.

Table 15. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Nitrogen (Refrigerated). Number of Median Placard ID Trucks Truck Configuration Quantity (lb) Load Origin Load Destination Loaded/Empty 1977 9 TT Tank (Cryo) 35,000a El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty a. Based on data from 5 shipments; Quantities for three other shipments listed as 600,000 cf (each).

Page

40

 Table 16 lists numbers of trucks, truck configurations, median quantities, and truck loading for bulk shipments of refrigerated liquid carbon dioxide between Juarez, Mexico, and El Paso, Texas, that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. Three of the four liquid carbon dioxide tank trucks were empty, returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments to Mexico. The truck placard and manifest data did not match for one truck, as noted.  Table 17 lists truck configurations, commodity names, quantities, origin-destination pairs, and truck loading individual shipments for shipments of liquid environmentally hazardous substances, hazardous waste, or other regulated substances that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. Three of the four trucks were empty tank trucks, returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments of around 22 short tons to Mexico.  Table 18 lists numbers of trucks, truck configurations, quantities, origin-destination pairs, and truck loading individual shipments for shipments of elevated temperature liquids that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. Nine of the 10 tank trucks were empty, returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments of around 23 short tons of asphalt or related materials to Mexico.  Table 19 lists numbers of trucks, truck configurations, packaging configurations, load origins, load destinations, and truck loading for shipments of airbag modules that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All trucks were loaded. There appeared to be some inconsistencies in manifest data for containerized shipments with El Paso destinations, as it was generally understood that these shipments were to be delivered for transshipment at El Paso rail yards, from where they would be transported to their final destinations.  Table 20 lists truck configurations, transported commodities, quantities, load origins, load destinations, and truck loading for shipments that were transported in non-placarded trucks that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. All trucks were loaded.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 41

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 16. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Carbon Dioxide (Refrigerated). A&M Number of Placard ID Trucks Truck Configuration Quantity Load Origin Load Destination Loaded/Empty

Transportation Institute Transportation 2187 3 TT Tank (Cryo) 600,000 cfa El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty 2187 1 TT Tank (Cryo) 20,000 lb El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Loaded 2187 1 TT Tank (Cryo) 34,000 lb El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty a. Based on data from 2 shipments; Quantities for another shipment listed as 35,000 lb. b. Shipping manifest was for shipment of Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid (UN/NA ID 1977). Truck was improperly placarded, or shipping manifest data were incorrect.

Table 17. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Liquid Environmentally Hazardous Substances, Hazardous Waste, or Other Regulated Substances. Truck Quantity Load Loaded/ Placard ID Configuration Commodity (lb) Load Origin Destination Empty 3082 TT Tank Diphenylmethane, Discyanate, enviro. 45,000 El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty

hazardous subs., liquid 3082 TT Tank Environmentally hazardous isocyanate, 44,820 El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty N.O.S. 3082 TT Tank Isocyanate (Bayer), enviro. hazardous 45,660 Pittsburg, PA Juarez, CH Empty substance, liquid, N.O.S. 3082 TT Box Dibutyl phthalate, Empty metal containers, 1,402 Juarez, CH Duluth, GA Loaded enviro. hazardous substance, liquid, N.O.S. Polyglycol diamine, Polymine, Amines, 351 Juarez, CH Duluth, GA Loaded liquid, corrosive, N.O.S.

Page

42

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 18. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Marked for Elevated Temperature Liquids. A&M Number of Average Marking ID Trucks Truck Configuration Quantity (lbs.) Load Origin Load Destination Loaded/Empty

Transportation Institute Transportation 3257/Hot 9 TT Tank 45,756a El Paso, TX Juarez, CH Empty 3257/Hot 1 TT Tank 41,094b Juarez, CH Clint, TX Loaded a. Various hot mix asphalt shipments or similar; Average based on data from 5 shipments; Quantities for two other shipments are ≈ 140 barrels each; Quantities for two other shipments are ≈ 5,850 gallons each. b. Shipment of Disproproportionated gum resin.

Table 19. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Placarded for Airbag Modules. Number of Truck Packaging Shipment Loaded/ Placard ID Trucks Configuration Configurations Shipment Origins Destinations Empty 3268 25 TT Box Bundles Chihuahua, CH Chicago, IL Loaded Cartons Juarez, CH Louisville, KY Containers Dearborn, MI Packages Detroit, MI Pallets Holt, MI Pieces Claycomo, MO Wentzville, MO El Paso, TX

3268 12 TT Container Bundles Chihuahua, CH Chicago, IL Loaded Cartons Juarez, CH Dearborn, MI Containers Detroit, MI Packages Warren, MI Pallets Toledo, OH Pieces El Paso, TX Milwaukee, WI Ontario, Canada

Page

43

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 20. Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Data: HazMat Shipment Information for Inbound Trucks That Were Not Placarded. A&M Truck Quantity Load Loaded/ Placard ID Configuration Commodity (lb) Load Origin Destination Empty

Transportation Institute Transportation No placard TT Box Fire extinguisher, nonflammable 16,724 Juarez, CH El Paso, TX Loaded compressed gas (UN/NA ID 1044, does not require placard); On pallets No placard TT Box Fire extinguisher, nonflammable 16,909 Juarez, CH El Paso, TX Loaded compressed gas (UN/NA ID 1044, does not require placard); On pallets No placard TT Box Hydrofluoric acid solution, LT 60% -- Juarez, CH Alorton, IL Loaded Strength (UN/NA ID 1790); One 250 mL bottle No placard S Box Flammable liquid, n.o.s. (Isopropanol- 35 Juarez, CH El Paso, TX Loaded methanol) (UN/NA ID 1993); One box No placard S Box Thermostat receptacles, small, contain gas 1,065 Juarez, CH El Paso, TX Loaded (cartridges) (UN/NA ID 2037); On pallets

Page

44

5.2.2 Carrier Safety Information

We also evaluated safety-related statistics for the trucking companies (carriers) who owned trucks that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey. The US DOT registration numbers were recorded for 156 of the 161 trucks in the shipping manifest survey. The DOT registration numbers were entered into the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration’s Safety and Fitness Electronic Records (SAFER) System Company Snapshot Web page (http://safer.fmcsa.dot.gov/CompanySnapshop.aspx). Information for each carrier was collected for the total number of U.S. inspections in 2009–2010, as well as the vehicle, driver, and HazMat out of service (OOS) ratings for the 24 months prior to July 2012. We identified the number of trucks for each carrier that were included in the shipping manifest survey, and associated placards that were observed on the trucks. This information is summarized in Table 21. Note that this analysis does not include safety information of the specific trucks that were included in the manifest survey, only the carriers that owned the trucks.

OOS ratings for carriers that were higher than national averages over the 2009–2010 timeperiod are identified in Table 21 using italicized text. The vehicle and driver OOS ratings for the carriers that were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey are all better than national averages. However, the information also shows that two of the three carriers included in the survey that were placarded for transport of liquid environmentally hazardous substances, hazardous waste, or other regulated substances (UN/NA ID 3082) have HazMat OOS ratings above national averages.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 45

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 21. Carrier Safety Information for Inbound Trucks from Zaragoza POE Shipping Manifest Survey. Total A&M National Inspection % Out of Service Number Company Inspections Trucks in

Transportation Transportation DOT # Company Legal Name 2009–2010 Vehicle Driver Hazmat Sample Placard IDs in Sample 74816 Texas International Gas & Oil Company 1,651 7.66% 1.57% 0.71% 24 1075 233222 Transportes Lopez y Hijos SA de CV 436 17.36% 0.23% 2.06% 4 1977, 2187 258923 Fletes Sotelo SA de CV 4,648 12.27% 0.49% 3.45% 2 2990, 3082

Institute 298907 Rinchem Company Inc. 290 9.82% 1.04% 2.80% 4 1052, Inhalation Hazard, Poison, Toxic

557870 Express Tres Fronteras SA de CV 2,852 16.67% 1.09% 0.61% 21 3268 558117 Eco Transportes Internationales SA de CV 674 7.74% 0.30% 4.30% 22 1044, 1046, 1436, 1866, 2037, 3077, 3164, 3257/Hot, 3306, Corrosive, Dangerous when wet, Flammable, Flammable solid, Class 9 589266 California Gas Transport Inc. 1,697 16.06% 1.42% 0.58% 31 1075 604849 Transportes Kemsa SA de CV 3,658 16.00% 0.22% 2.39% 14 3268, 3164

640568 Praxair Mexico S de RL de CV 171 4.68% 0.00% 0.66% 7 1977, 2187 683428 Operadora de Transporte Internacional 8,971 13.65% 0.64% 15.38% 1 3082, Class 9 SA de CV 736393 Guyahnos SA de CV 58 10.34% 0.00% 0.00% 1 3170 739066 Asfaltos de la Frontera SA de CV 180 14.44% 0.56% 0.00% 5 3257/Hot 753534 Activa Transportes y Servicios 99 6.12% 0.00% 2.17% 5 1951, 1977, 2187 Especializados SA de CV 797792 Asfaltos y Pavimentos de Ciudad Juarez 29 3.45% 0.00% 0.00% 2 3257/Hot SA de CV 815942 Transportes Hermanos Beltran SA de CV 308 8.17% 0.00% 0.00% 2 3268 824454 Transportes Soto y Hijos SA de CV 1,585 10.78% 0.44% 0.00% 1 3164 1613307 Deborah Lynn 0 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 1075 1613507 Transportadora Silza SA de CV 41 9.76% 0.00% 0.00% 5 1075 1692179 Border Express de Mexico SA de CV 671 7.74% 0.30% 7.14% 2 Non-flammable gas 2153151 Antonio Enrique Campos Lee 124 13.51% 0.00% 6.25% 2 3082 Total 156 National Averages (2009–2010) 20.72% 5.51% 4.50%

Page

46

5.2.3 Comparison with Data from 2004 Survey

We compared the proportions of inbound placarded trucks from the 2004 survey as discussed in Section 3.2 with the proportions of inbound placarded trucks from the 2012 traffic video data analysis to identify whether the proportions of trucks with HazMat placards varies statistically by year.

For the 2004 data, there were a total of around 3,055 inbound trucks, of which 160 were placarded, corresponding to 5.2 percent of trucks being placarded. For the 2012 traffic video data, there were a total of 3,261 inbound trucks, of which 132 were placarded, corresponding to 4.0 percent of the trucks being placarded. There is a statistical difference in the proportions of placarded trucks to non-placarded trucks by year (χ2 = 5.06, df = 1, p ≈ .025; Fisher Exact Test: p = .026). This suggests that the proportion of placarded trucks in the 2012 sample may be different than the proportion of placarded trucks in the 2004 sample.

However, the practical importance of such a difference is debatable. Assuming a difference of approximately 1 percent between the two years, this corresponds to between 10 and 15 additional HazMat trucks per day through Zaragoza POE at current traffic levels. By comparison, we estimated between 25 and 50 HazMat trucks per daytime hours (8 a.m. to 5 p.m.) on the Cesar E. Chavez Border Highway (TX 375), which receives inbound traffic from the Zaragoza POE. Thus, any difference in proportions of truck traffic placarded for hazardous materials for 2004 and 2012 likely has only modest effects on the numbers of inbound placarded trucks passing through Zaragoza POE and traveling on adjacent roadways.

We also compared the top inbound commodities from the 2004 survey (Table 5) with the numbers of placards observed on trucks for the same commodities in our 2012 samples, as measured using the traffic video data (Table 9), and the manifest survey data (Table 11). This was done to identify whether the types of hazardous materials that were transported by inbound trucks at Zaragoza POE is different between the two years. Some commodities were grouped according to type or similarity in classification, as summarized in Table 22.

Based on the reported amounts and these commodity groupings, the evidence is insufficient (Chi-square tests) to conclude that there is statistical dependence between the 2004 top commodities and the number of placards observed on trucks for the same types of commodities in either of our samples from 2012. This suggests that, when considered in these groupings, the overall mix of these particular groupings of commodities, relative to each other, is similar between the two years. Note however that these data do not include all placard observations in either 2004 or 2012. Further, the selected commodities are based only on those reported as top commodities from the 2004 study. This also does not necessarily indicate that the relative mix of these commodity types was similar during years between the samples (2005 through 2011) or at other times of the year.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 47

Table 22. Comparison of Top Commodities (2004) and Observed Placards (2012) on Inbound Trucks at Zaragoza POE. Frequencies 2012 2012 2004 Top Video Manifest Commodity Classifications Commodities Placards Placards Liquefied petroleum gas (UN/NA ID 1075) and 82 54 63 Flammable gases (Cl. 2.1) Carbon dioxide, refrigerated liquid 9 5 5 (UN/NA ID 2187) Poisonous or toxic liquids and gases 2 4 5 (Cl. 2.3/6.1)* Flammable and combustible liquids (Cl. 3) 7 5 5 Flammable solids; Spontaneously combustible 3 4 4 materials; Dangerous when wet materials (Cl. 4) Corrosive materials (Cl. 8) 7 8 7 Elevated temp. liquids, n.o.s., at or above 100 C 62 40 54 and below its flash point (Asphalt) (UN/NA ID 3257); Miscellaneous dangerous goods (includes UN/NA IDs 3077 and Other Cl. 9 materials for 2012 data); Environmentally hazardous substances (UN/NA ID 3082) Subtotal Above: 172 120 143 * For 2004 reported commodities, includes Nitriles, poisonous, flammable, n.o.s. (UN/NA ID 3275); For 2012 observed placards, includes ‘Inhalation hazard,’ ‘Poison,’ and ‘Toxic’ placards on trucks carrying hydrogen fluoride (also included in their primary hazard class for corrosive materials, Class 8).

5.3 OTHER ANALYSIS OF INBOUND TRUCK TRAFFIC

We reviewed the 2012 traffic video data for information about whether non-placarded trucks were loaded or empty, based on indications from truck drivers and prescreening personnel that were captured on video. We were able to identify whether a truck was loaded or empty for 1,932 trucks. A total of 1,421 of these trucks were loaded (73.6 percent), and 511 of these trucks were empty (26.4 percent). While this only represents a portion of the 2012 traffic video data sample, we do not expect a systematic bias for those trucks for which it was unknown whether the truck was loaded or empty based on video data (e.g., because the screener was either off-screen, or because trucks were being allowed to pass through the facility without screening during breaks). Thus, we expect this proportion generally applies for all non-hazmat trucks that passed through the facility during the survey timeperiod.

During the last three days of the survey at Zaragoza POE, we also collected information about the contents of loaded non-placarded trucks by asking truck drivers about cargo contents, and/or examination of shipping manifest documents. The results of this survey, which includes a total of 889 non-placarded truckloads, are included in Table 23. Note that this only includes inbound trucks that passed through the Zaragoza POE during the times we collected data, not the total time that the port was open on these three days. We then categorized truckloads of different non-hazmat commodity types as follows, with numbers of trucks in each category noted in parenthesis:

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 48

 Automotive parts (133 trucks).  Other motorized vehicles/wheeled appliances (34 trucks).  Home and office furnishings, appliances, and parts (194 trucks).  Miscellaneous automotive, vehicle, and/or appliance parts (163 trucks).  Construction/home improvement materials and tools (147 trucks).  Scrap (37 trucks).  Food and food supplies (20 trucks).  Other (161 trucks).

Table 23. Manual Count Data: Non-HazMat Commodity Categories and Types on Inbound Trucks during Survey Hours at Zaragoza POE on June 11, 12, and 14, 2012. Number of Trucks by Date Category and Commodity Type 11-Jun 12-Jun 14-Jun Automotive parts

Air bags 3 3

Aluminum wheels 3 11 3 Automotive bands 1

Auto parts 13 19 21 Batteries, no acid 2 3

Seats/seat covers/leather seats/interior parts 14 10 13 Radiators 1 1 3 Steering wheels 1

Windshield wipers 1 4 3 Other motorized vehicles/wheeled appliances

ATVs/RVs/motorcycles 8 5 4 ATVs/RVs/motorcycle parts 1 1

Farm equipment/trailers 1

Lawnmowers 1 4 4 Lawnmower parts 1 4

Home and office furnishings, appliances, and parts

Computers 4 7 10 Computer parts 7 4 2 Digital cameras/parts 2 1

Electrical appliances (small) 1 Ink cartridge/toner 2 1 2 Fixtures lighting 3 1

Furniture/metal cabinets 3 7 2 Lamps/lamp parts 1 1 4 Laser scanner/printer 2 2 1 LCD monitors 3

Light fixtures 2

Refrigerators/freezers 10 22 24

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 49

Number of Trucks by Date Category and Commodity Type 11-Jun 12-Jun 14-Jun Refrigerator/freezer parts 3 1 1 Satellite dishes 1

Smoke detectors/alarms 1 3 1 AC condensers, AC/heating parts 1 6

TVs 2 5

TV amplifiers 1

Vacuum cleaners/parts 4 3 4 Washing/drying machines 4 11 6 Washer/dryer parts 2 1

Water heaters/parts 2

Misc. automotive, vehicle, and/or appliances parts

Airplanes/helicopter/airplane and helicopter parts 3

Aluminum parts 1

Boat parts 1

Brake plates/pads 3 2 1 Box for AC/steering 2

Cables/wiring/connectors 1

Capacitors/conductors 3 2

Controllers 1

Electrical components/electrical parts 11 27 10 Electrical harness 7 14

Electrical insulation 1

Electric motors 1 12

Engine/lubricating oil 2 1

Engine assembly 1

Fuel pump, fuel assemblies, fuel assembly parts 2 3 1 Hose 1

Igniters 1

Instrument control cluster 1

LED lamps/LED displays 1 6 1 Metal cover/metal parts 1 4

Weld box, endoserve 1

Speakers 3 2 2 Signals/switches/key switches 1 1

Timers/photo control/thermostats 1 2

Wiring harnesses/assemblies 13 5 3 Construction/home improvement materials and tools

Ballast 1 1 1 Box meters 3 2 1

Bricks 1

Cement 5

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 50

Number of Trucks by Date Category and Commodity Type 11-Jun 12-Jun 14-Jun Ceramic tiles/travertine 19 18 6 Curved shears 1

Damper housing seal 1

Electrical cabinets/transformers/fuses 3 Filtrete/corrugated filters/air filters/filter frames 5 10 3 House supplies 1

Iron/steel articles 1

Ladders/aluminum ladders/fiberglass ladders 21 14 9 Lock set 1 1

Molding 1

Sandpaper 1

Sprinklers/irrigation equipment 2 3

Stone 1 1

Vinyl 1 1

Wire, electrical/cables 2 1 Wood 1 3

Scrap

Scrap 3 7 1 Scrap metal 2 13 3 Scrap/waste paper 1 3

Scrap plastic 1

Scrap wire 2 1

Food and food supplies

Aprons 1

Jalapenos/peppers 4 8

Pecans 2

Potato chips 4

Vegetables, prepared in vinegar 1

Other

ATM parts 1 1

Barrels, aluminum 1

Barrels/containers, plastic 4 3 4 Bingo cards and game parts 1

Bite block 1

Box connector 1

Cardboard/cardboard boxes 6 1 1 Cell phones/phone parts/communications equipment 6 5 2 Cloth, fabric 4 3

Clothing/jeans 5 2

Concrete boxes 3 1

Coffins 2

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 51

Number of Trucks by Date Category and Commodity Type 11-Jun 12-Jun 14-Jun Coolers, boxes 1

Cotton, ginned/bales 1 2

Foam/foam products 2 1

Environmental staples 1

Eye glasses 1

Illuminated signs 1

Laser gun 1

Mail 1

Medical/hospital supplies 8 17 13 Metal boxes, parts 4 2

Metal ribbon/foil 1

Miscellaneous items 1

Needles, sewing kits 1

Other mineral substances 1

Paper 2 1

Photo film 1

Plastic, plastic parts 8 3

Plastic boxes/lids/trays/pallets 5 8

Radio phone 1

Seals 6

Rubber soles 1

Sherpa body pillow 1

Spool drums 1

Steel/aluminum bars, steel rolls 4

Temporary use goods 1

Totals: 280 385 224

5.4 SUMMARY FOR ZARAGOZA POE

Truck traffic that was inbound to the U.S. from Mexico at the Zaragoza International Port of Entry during our survey included a limited range of hazardous materials. Truck traffic levels normalized to a period of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. totaled around 950 trucks, and HazMat placarded truck traffic comprised around 4 percent of trucks at Zaragoza POE. While the overall proportion of placarded truck traffic at Zaragoza POE in our survey appears to be slightly less when compared with data from 2004, the practical effects of this difference are likely minimal on the overall levels of HazMat truck traffic through the port, and compared with levels on nearby major roadways. In addition, the relative mix of different types of predominant hazardous commodities through the port does not appear to be significantly different for the 2004 and 2012 data.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 52

The large majority of inbound placarded tank truck traffic at Zaragoza POE was for empty loads that were placarded for liquefied petroleum gas, non-flammable gases including refrigerated carbon dioxide and refrigerated nitrogen, and liquid asphalt. Four of the six inbound, loaded, placarded tank trucks at Zaragoza POE were for hydrofluoric acid shipments (UN/NA ID 1052), a corrosive, toxic liquid. Inbound box truck traffic at Zaragoza POE was primarily for shipments of airbag modules. There were also shipments of environmentally hazardous substances and hazardous waste in both bulk (tank truck) and breakbulk packaging (drums and totes in box trucks).

The safety profile of companies whose trucks were included in the Zaragoza POE shipping manifest survey were better than national averages for vehicle and driver out-of-service ratings. There were a few trucks from carriers with HazMat OOS ratings higher than national averages, and these were primarily associated with shipments of environmentally hazardous substances or hazardous wastes.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 53

6 2012 ANTHONY POE HAZMAT SURVEY RESULTS

This chapter describes results of truck traffic and shipping manifest surveys at the Anthony POE.

6.1 MANUAL TRUCK COUNT ANALYSIS

Manual counts of westbound truck traffic on I-10 at the Anthony POE were conducted by observing truck traffic at the port facility. The manual count data were recorded using handwritten notes on a template form, transcribed to Microsoft Excel, and analyzed. Table 24 shows the hours of manually collected data for westbound I-10 at Anthony POE, by hour of day and date.

Table 24. Hours of Manual Truck Traffic Count Data from Westbound I-10, Anthony POE, Doña Ana County, New Mexico.

Hour of Hours of Data, by Date Day 4/4 5/16 5/18 6/14 Total 5 1.0 1.0

6 0.5 0.5

7 0.5 1.0 1.5

8 0.5 0.5 1.0

9 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0

10 0.5 0.5 0.5 1.5

11 1.0 1.0 1.0 3.0

12 0.5 0.5 1.0

13 1.0 0.5 1.5

14 1.0 1.0

15 1.0 1.0

Total 1.0 5.0 4.5 5.5 16.0

The following figures and tables were developed using the manual traffic count data for the dates and times listed in Table 25.  Figure 15 shows a chart of overall westbound truck traffic levels at Anthony POE. Truck traffic levels suggest an increasing trend during the day until early afternoon on the dates and times that data were collected.  Figure 16 shows a chart of the proportions of westbound truck traffic types, by hour of day, at Anthony POE. Box trucks are the predominant configuration at all times of day that data were collected.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 54

 Figure 17 shows a chart of the proportions of westbound trucks observed with HazMat placards at Anthony POE, by hour of day. Percentages of placard trucks ranged between two and nine percent, and generally decreased from morning to early afternoon.  Table 25 lists the overall proportions of truck traffic by truck configuration and type, and the percentages of each truck configuration/type category with HazMat placards or markings. We identified trucks that did not enter the port facilities (PrePass Trucks), as well as those that did enter the port facility (POE Trucks).

Nearly half of all observed trucks were box van trucks, and most of these were tractor-trailer configurations. Around one percent of straight and tractor-trailer box trucks were placarded, but more than nine percent of multi-trailer box trucks were placarded. Approximately six percent of observed trucks were tank trucks, and around half of these were placarded. More than two-thirds of placarded trucks entered the POE facility.  Table 26 lists the number of placards by placard ID that were observed on trucks at Anthony POE, including those on PrePass trucks and those on trucks that entered the POE facility. The most-frequent placards observed were for UN/NA IDs 1203, 1993, and ‘Corrosive,’ and ‘Flammable’ placards. Of placards on trucks that did not enter the POE facility, most were for UN/NA ID 1203 or ‘Corrosive’ placards. As for Zaragoza POE, the total number of placards observed was greater than the number of placarded trucks reported in Table 25, as some trucks displayed multiple placards.  Table 27 lists the number of placards by HazMat class that were observed on trucks at Anthony POE, including those on PrePass trucks and those on trucks that entered the POE facility. The most-frequent HazMat classes for observed placards observed were for Class 3 flammable and combustible materials, and Class 8 corrosive materials.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 55

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Weekday Truck Traffic on I-10 WB, Anthony Port of Entry, A&M Doña Ana County, New Mexico

Transportation Institute Transportation 250

Westbound

200 Trendline (Westbound Traffic)

Notes

Truck Traffic: 150  1,730 WB trucks from 8 a.m.-5 p.m.

Truck and HazMat traffic

estimates do not reflect daily, weekly, or seasonal variations. Estimates use 100 data collected on the following dates in 2012:

Number of Trucks (Avg.) Trucks of Number Apr. 5, May 15, 17, Jun. 13.

50

0 August 2012 by 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hour of Day

Page Figure 15. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Observed Weekday Truck Traffic on I-10 WB.

56

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Weekday Percentage of Truck Traffic by Type on I-10 WB, A&M Tank Truck % Anthony Port of Entry, Doña Ana County, New Mexico

Transportation Institute Transportation 70% Box Truck %

Flatbed Truck % 60% Notes

 6.3% of trucks were tankers 50% (90% CI = 5.6-6.9%)

 50.7% of trucks were box (90% CI = 49.4-52.1%)

40%  12.9% of trucks were flatbeds (90% CI = 11.9-13.9%)

Traffic estimates do not reflect daily, weekly, or seasonal variations. 30% Estimates use data collected on the following dates in 2012:

Apr. 5, May 15, 17, Jun. 13. Percentage of Truck Traffic Truck of Percentage

20%

10%

0% August 2012 by 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hour of Day

Page Figure 16. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Observed Weekday Truck Traffic by Truck Type on I-10 WB.

57

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Weekday Percentage of All Truck Traffic with Placard on I-10 WB, A&M Anthony Port of Entry, Doña Ana County, New Mexico

Transportation Institute Transportation 10%

9%

Westbound

8%

7% Notes

6%  4.2% of WB trucks were placarded from 8 a.m.-5 p.m. (90% CI = 3.5-4.9%)

5%  6.5% of WB trucks were placarded from 5 a.m.-8 a.m. (90% CI = 4.7-9.0%) 4% Traffic estimates do not reflect daily, weekly, or seasonal variations. 3% Estimates use data collected on the following dates in 2012:

Percentage of Truck Traffic with Placard with Traffic Truck of Percentage Apr. 5, May 15, 17, Jun. 13. 2%

1%

0% August 2012 by 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 Hour of Day

Page Figure 17. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday Percentage of Placarded Tank Truck Traffic on I-10 WB.

58

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 25. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday Truck Size and Type and HazMat Placard Observations. Placarded Total Percent of Truck Size A&M Truck Size PrePass PrePass Placarded Total Placarded and Type With

Transportation Institute Transportation and Type Trucks Trucks POE Trucks POE Trucks Trucks Trucks HazMat Placard Straight 104 0 236 3 340 3 0.9% Box 54 0 106 1 160 1 0.6% Flatbed 14 0 23 0 37 0 0.0% Other 32 0 83 0 115 0 0.0% Refrigerated 1 0 4 0 5 0 0.0%

Tank 1 0 5 2 6 2 33.3% Utility 2 0 15 0 17 0 0.0% Tractor-Trailer 860 31 1,361 75 2,221 106 4.8% Box 476 4 581 7 1,057 11 1.0% Dry Tank 11 0 7 0 18 0 0.0%

Flatbed 85 0 207 4 292 4 1.4% Other 73 0 146 2 219 2 0.9% Refrigerated 149 0 316 0 465 0 0.0% Tank 66 27 104 62 170 89 52.4% Multi-Trailer 51 2 65 9 116 11 9.5% Box 47 1 62 9 109 10 9.2% Flatbed 0 0 2 0 2 0 0.0% Other 3 0 0 0 3 0 0.0% Refrigerated 0 0 1 0 1 0 0.0% Tank 1 1 0 0 1 1 100.0% Grand Total 1,015 33 1,662 87 2,677 120 4.5% Note: Includes data collected on May 15, 17, Jun. 13, 2012.

Page

59

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 26. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Weekday ‘Most Frequent’ UN/NA Placard IDs on Observed Trucks. % of Total A&M 2008 PrePass POE Total Placards UN/NA ID Material Description Class ERG # Placards Placards Placards Counted

Transportation Institute Transportation 1203 Gasoline, gasohol, or motor fuel 3 128 14 22 36 26.5% 1993 Combustible liquid, n.o.s.† 3 128 1 16 17 12.5% Corrosive Corrosive 8 153 6 8 14 10.3% Flammable Flammable 3 127 1 6 7 5.1% 1202 Diesel fuel, fuel oil, gas oil, or heating 3 128 1 4 5 3.7%

oil 2014 Hydrogen peroxide 5.1 140 2 3 5 3.7% 3257/Hot Elevated temperature liquid, n.o.s, at 9 128 0 5 5 3.7% or above 100°C (212°F), and below its flash point 1075 Liquefied petroleum gas; or other 2.1 115 1 3 4 2.9% related gases‡

Dangerous Unknown Unk. 111 1 3 4 2.9% Non-flammable gas Non-flammable gas 2.2 121 0 4 4 2.9% Red Unidentified red placard Unk. Unk. 4 0 4 2.9% Subtotal Above 31 74 105 77.2%

Total Placards* 37 99 136 100.0%

†Includes combustible liquid, n.o.s.; compound, cleaning liquid (flammable); compound, tree or weed killing, liquid (flammable); diesel fuel; fuel oil; medicines, flammable, liquid, n.o.s.; and refrigerating machine. ‡Includes butane; butane mixture; butylene; isobutane; isobutane mixture; isobutylene; propane; propane mixture; and propylene. * Other UN/NA IDs include: (3 placards) 1830, 2201, Class 3; (2 placards) 1046, 1866, 3077; (1 placard) 1230, 1755, 1760, 1770, 1972, 2582, 2789, 3082, 3264, 3265, 3266, Flammable gas, Green, Inhalation hazard, Oxidizer, Poison. Note: Includes data collected on May 15, 17, Jun. 13, 2012.

Page

60

Table 27. Anthony POE Manual Count Data: Number of Placards, by Primary HazMat Class/Division, on Observed Trucks. Primary PrePass Percent of Total Class/Division Placards POE Placards Total Placards Placards 2.1 1 5 6 4.4% 2.2 1 9 10 7.4% 2.3 or 6.1 0 1 1 0.7% 3 20 51 71 52.2% 5.1 3 3 6 4.4% 6.1 0 1 1 0.7% 8 6 19 25 18.4% 9 1 7 8 5.9% Unknown 5 3 8 5.9% Overall Total 37 99 136 100.0% Note: Includes data collected on May 15, 17, Jun. 13, 2012.

6.2 SHIPPING MANIFEST DATA ANALYSIS

In addition to the manually-collected data described in Section 6.1, we also collected data from shipping manifest information from trucks that passed through the Anthony POE and were identified through prescreening by NMMTP inspectors as carrying hazardous materials. These data are described in a separate section because the shipping manifest data collection does not correspond exactly with the manually-collected data. In some cases, trucks that were recorded in the manually-collected data were not included in the shipping manifest data collection, and vice- versa.

6.2.1 Shipment Types, Origins, and Destinations

Table 28 lists the placards that were observed on trucks included in the HazMat shipping manifest survey at Anthony POE. Based on a comparison of the HazMat IDs for trucks included in the shipping manifest survey (Table 28) with the HazMat IDs for trucks included in the manually-collected data (Table 26), the frequencies of commodity classifications correspond to each other. (They should, as the data collection for the two samples generally but not completely overlaps.) This suggests that the shipping manifest data collection at Anthony POE was not biased toward particular commodity types, compared with general HazMat traffic on westbound I-10.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 61

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 28. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: ‘Most Frequent’ UN/NA Placard IDs on Surveyed Trucks. % of Total A&M 2008 Placards UN/NA ID Material Description Class ERG # Placards Counted

Transpo 1203 Gasoline, gasohol, or motor fuel 3 128 22 20.6% Corrosive Corrosive 8 153 13 12.1%

rtation Institute rtation 1993 Combustible liquid, n.o.s.† 3 128 11 10.3% Flammable Flammable 3 127 10 9.3% Dangerous Unknown Unk. 111 6 5.6%

1075 Liquefied petroleum gas; or other related gases‡ 2.1 115 5 4.7% Non-flammable gas Non-flammable gas 2.2 121 4 3.7% 1202 Diesel fuel, fuel oil, gas oil, or heating oil 3 128 3 2.8% 3257/Hot Elevated temperature liquid, n.o.s, at or above 100°C 9 128 3 2.8% (212°F), and below its flash point Oxidizer Oxidizer 5.1 140 3 2.8%

Subtotal Above 80 74.8%

Total Placards* 107 100.0%

†Includes combustible liquid, n.o.s.; compound, cleaning liquid (flammable); compound, tree or weed killing, liquid (flammable); diesel fuel; fuel oil; medicines, flammable, liquid, n.o.s.; and refrigerating machine. ‡Includes butane; butane mixture; butylene; isobutane; isobutane mixture; isobutylene; propane; propane mixture; and propylene. * Other UN/NA IDs include: 1830, 2014, Poison, 1046, 1170, 1268, 1755, 1760, 1826, 1863, 1866, 1942, 1972, 1977, 2201, 2921, 3077, 3264, 3265, 3266, 3272, Class 8, Flammable Gas, Inhalation Hazard.

Page

62

Table 29 lists the number of placards by HazMat class that was observed on trucks included in the shipping manifest data collection at Anthony POE. The most-frequent HazMat classes included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey were for Class 3 flammable and combustible materials, and Class 8 corrosive materials.

Table 29. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Number of HazMat Placards, by HazMat Class/Division, on Surveyed Trucks. No. Placards Percent Placards Class/Division Observed Observed 2.1 7 6.5% 2.2 7 6.5% 2.3 or 6.1 1 0.9% 3 51 47.7% 5.1 6 5.6% 6.1 2 1.9% 8 23 21.5% 9 4 3.7% Unknown 6 5.6% Overall Total 107 100.0%

There were 59 tank trucks included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey. Table 30 summarizes whether these tank trucks were ‘Loaded’ or ‘Empty,’ or the load was ‘Unknown’ by placard/commodity number. Overall, 50 of the 59 tank trucks were loaded, 6 were empty, and the load was unknown for 3 tank trucks.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 63

Table 30. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Tank Truck Loading Classifications. ‘Empty’ UN/NA ‘Loaded’ Tank Tank Load Total Tank Placard ID Tank Trucks Trucks Unknown Trucks 1046 1 1

1075 2 1 3 1202 5 1 6 1203 19 3 22 1268 1 1 1826 1 1 1830 2 2 1863 1 1 1866 2 2 1972 1 1 1977 1 1

1993 9 9

2014 2 2

2201 1 1

3077 1 1

3257 3 3

3266 1 1

3272 1 1

Total 50 6 3 59

The data collected in the shipping manifest survey at Anthony POE includes a much greater diversity of shipments for the different types and classes of hazardous materials than for Zaragoza POE. Because of this, the Anthony POE shipment data presented in this section for individual commodities are summarized more generally by each class of hazardous material than was presented in Chapter 5 for Zaragoza POE.  Tables 31 through 36 list the commodity names and number of shipments according to the respective placards that were displayed on trucks included in the shipping manifest survey at Anthony POE for Class 2, Class 3, Class 5.1, Class 6.1, Class 8, and Class 9 materials, respectively. The tables list only those commodity shipments associated with the respective class of materials that are summarized. If one or more trucks displayed placards for multiple classes of materials, for example, a ‘Corrosive’ (Class 8) placard and a ‘Flammable’ (Class 3) placard on the same truck, only shipments of Class 3 materials are listed in the table that summarizes Class 3 shipments, even though the truck(s) also contained shipments of Class 8 materials.  Class 2 materials consisted primarily of bulk shipments of flammable gases and non- flammable gases, as well as breakbulk shipments of gases in cylinders. There were also package shipments of gases in cases or boxes of aerosol cans and fire extinguishers.  Class 3 materials consisted of bulk shipments of fuels, as well as breakbulk and package shipments (e.g., totes, containers, pails and buckets) of a variety of flammable liquids such as paints, paint thinning compounds, alcohols, etc. There were some packages shipments of cans of flammable liquids.  Class 5.1 materials consisted of bulk shipments of hydrogen peroxide solutions and breakbulk (bagged and palletized) shipments of ammonium nitrate. There were also package shipments of compounds such as chemicals for water treatment.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 64

 Class 6 materials consisted of feedstock chemicals used in industrial manufacturing, including pharmaceuticals, herbicides, and pesticides.  Class 8 materials consisted of a wide range of bulk and breakbulk shipments (totes, containers, drums, pails, etc.). These include acids and bases for industrial feedstock and waste chemicals. There were also shipments of wet batteries.  Class 9 materials consisted of bulk and breakbulk shipments of environmentally hazardous substances and hazardous wastes, and bulk shipments of elevated temperature liquids.

Table 31. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 2 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments 1046 Helium, compressed 1 1075 Liquefied petroleum gas, or similar 3 1972 Methane, refrigerated liquid 1 1977 Nitrogen, refrigerated liquid 1 1993, Dangerous Compressed gas, flammable, N.O.S. 1 2201, Nitrous oxide, refrigerated liquid 1 Non-flammable gas Corrosive, Aerosols, Flammable, 2.1 1 Dangerous Dangerous, Class 8 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane 1 Flammable gas, Acetylene 1 Non-flammable gas Carbon dioxide 2.2 1 Helium (compressed) 1 Hydrogen 1 Nitrogen (compressed) 1 Nitrous oxide 1 Oxygen (compressed) 1 Propane 2 Non-flammable gas 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane, Non- flammable gas 1 Argon (75%)/Carbon dioxide (25%) 1 Carbon dioxide, compressed 1 Nitrogen, compressed 1 Oxygen, compressed 1 No placard 1,1,1,2-Tetrafluoroethane 1 Aerosols 2.1 1 Fire extinguishers 2.2 1 Lighters 2 Liquefied gas, N.O.S. 2.2 (Chlorodifluoromethane, 1 1,1,1- Trifluoro ethane, Pentafluoroethane) Liquefied gas, N.O.S. 2.2 (Hydrofluorocarbons) 1 Nitrogen, compressed gas 2.2 1 Propylene 1 Grand Total 33

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 65

Table 32. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 3 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments 1170 Ethanol 1 Gasoline, gasohol, motor fuel 1 1202 Diesel 3 1203 86 Octane 1 Biodiesel 1 Diesel 6 Gasoline, gasohol, motor fuel 17 Hydrobate 1 1268 Kerosene 1 1863 JPA - Jet fuel 1 1866 Resin solution, or similar 1 1993 Diesel 6 Naphthalene - Nalco 1 Transmix, flammable liquid, N.O.S. 1 3272 Esters, N.O.S., (contains Propylene glycol monomethyl ether acetate) 1 1755, 1760, Combustible liquids, N.O.S. (Naphthalene, 1,2,4-Trimethyl benzene) 1 1826, 1993, Corrosive 1993, Methanol, flammable liquid, N.O.S. 1 Dangerous Corrosive, Alcohols, N.O.S. (Contains Ethyl alcohol, Methanol, 3, PGII) 1 Dangerous Paint related material (3, PGII) 1 Paint, or similar 1 Corrosive, Isopropenylbenzene, marine pollutant, (Alpha-methyl styrene) 1 Flammable Dangerous Resin solution, or similar 1 Dangerous, Paint related materials, and associated solvents 5 Flammable Flammable Adhesives 1 Flammable liquid, Microblend brake parts cleaner, N.O.S., 1 (Hexane, Isopropanol) IPA 1 Methyl acetate 1 Pail, coating solution 1 Paint related materials 1 Paint, or similar 2 Triethylamine 1 Xylenes 1 No placard Alcohols, N.O.S. 1 Ethanol solutions 1 Flammable liquids, N.O.S. (Ethanol) 1 IPA 1 Paint, or similar 2 Petroleum distillates, N.O.S. 1 Xylenes 2 Grand Total 74

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 66

Table 33. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 5.1 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments 1942 Ammonium nitrate 1 2014 Hydrogen peroxide solution, aqueous, 30 percent 1 2014, Corrosive Hydrogen peroxide solution 1 Corrosive Calcium hydrochlorite mixture, dry, 5.1 1 Oxidizing solid, N.O.S. 5.1 (1-Brano-3-Cloro 5,5- 1 Dimethylhydantoin) Corrosive, Oxidizer Bioguard (Calcium hypochlorite, hydrated mixtures, 5.1, II RQ 1 Bioguard (Hydrogen peroxide, aqueous solutions, 5.1, (8) II) 1 Bioguard (Oxidizing solid, N.O.S., Lithium hypochlorite mixture, 1 5.1, III) Bioguard (Trichloroisocyanuric acid, dry, mixture, 5.1, II) 1 Dangerous, Chromium trioxide, anhydrous 1 Flammable Oxidizer Ammonium nitrate 1 No placard Chlorinating tablets - oxidizer 5.1 1 Grand Total 12

Table 34. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 6.1 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments Dangerous, Class 8 Hydrazine, aqueous solution 1 Dangerous, Toxic, liquids, organic, n.o.s., (Methylene choride phenol 1 Flammable mixture) Flammable Carbonate pesticide, liquid, toxic, flammable, contains 1 Methomyl, Cyclohexane, and Methanol Poison Furfuryl alcohol 1 Organophosphorus pesticides, toxic, liquid, flammable 1 Grand Total 5

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 67

Table 35. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 8 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed on Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments 1830 Sulfuric acid 2 2921 Corrosive solid, flammable, N.O.S. (N-Hexane, Titanium tetrachloride) 1 3264 Corrosive liquid, acidic, inorganic, N.O.S. (Ferric sulfate) 1 3265 Corrosive liquid, acidic, organic, N.O.S., (1-Hydroxyethylene-1, 1 1-Diphosphonic acid) 3266 Sodium thiophosphate, corrosive, basic, inorganic, combustible, N.O.S. 1 1755, 1760, 1826, Waste chromic acid solution, 8 1 1993, Corrosive Waste corrosive liquid, acidic, inorganic, N.O.S. (contains Chromic acid, 1 Nitric acid, Silver nitrate, Hydrofluoric acid), 8 Waste corrosive liquid, acidic, organic, N.O.S. (Nitric acid, Hydrofluoric 1 acid) Waste corrosive liquid, acidic, organic, N.O.S. (Sulfuric acid, Thiourea) 1 Waste corrosive liquids, oxidizing, N.O.S. (Nitric acid) 1 Waste corrosive liquids, N.O.S. (Hydrochloric acid), 8 1 Waste hydrochloric acid, solution 1 Waste nitrating acid mixtures, spent, N.O.S., (Nitric acid), 8 1 Waste phosphoric acid, 8 1 Waste sulfuric acid 2 Waste sulfuric acid mixture, spent 1 Corrosive Aluminum fluoride solution 1 Amines, liquid, corrosive, N.O.S., 8, III (Amines) 1 Batteries, wet, filled with acid, Class 8 1 Corrosive liquids N.O.S. (Sodium hydroxide solution), 8 1 Ethylenediamine 1 Hydrochloric acid 1 Sodium hypochlorite 2 Corrosive, Corrosive liquid, acidic, organic, N.O.S. (Ethephon), 8 , III 1 Dangerous Paint related material, 8, PG II 1 Sulfuric acid 1 Corrosive, Morpholine 1 Flammable Corrosive, Titanium tetrachloride 1 Inhalation hazard Corrosive, Proguard, corrosive solid, acidic, inorganic, N.O.S. (Monosulfate 1 Oxidizer compound) Dangerous 45 pails of Isophorone diamine fluorite 1 Dangerous, Class Corrosive liquids, toxic, N.O.S. (Sodium hydroxide/Sodium nitrite) 1 8 Morpholine/Potassium hydroxide 1 Phosphoric acid solution 1 Potassium hydroxide 1 Dangerous, Batteries, wet, filled with Alkali; Life-saving devices, self-inflating 2 Flammable Chromic acid solution 1 Flammable Corrosive liquid, basic, inorganic, N.O.S. 1 No placard Acid, corrosive 1 Corrosive liquid, acidic, inorganic, N.O.S., (Phosphoric acid, Sulfuric acid) 1 Corrosive liquid, basic, inorganic, N.O.S. 1 Corrosive solid, acidic, inorganic, N.O.S., (Monopersulfate compound) 1 Corrosive liquids, N.O.S., 8 1 Disodium trioxosilicate 1 Hydrochloric acid, solution 1 Sodium hydroxide 1 Grand Total 50

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 68

Table 36. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Class 9 Material Shipments by Placards Displayed Trucks. Placard(s) on Number of Trucks Commodity Name Shipments 3077 Silica sand, environmentally hazardous substance, solid, N.O.S., 1 contains Lead 3257 Asphalt, elevated temperature liquid, or similar 2 Elevated temperature liquid, N.O.S. (Polyisobutylene) 1 1755, 1760, 1826, Hazardous waste, liquid, N.O.S. (contains Themersol, Silver K, 1 1993, Corrosive Barium, or Silver) Corrosive Baquacil, premium algicide - ORM-D 1 Corrosive, Consumer commodity 1 Dangerous Corrosive, Environmentally hazardous substances, liquid, N.O.S. (Triphenyl 1 Flammable, phosphate, Phosphoric acid, Isodecyl diphenyl ester) Dangerous, Class 8 Environmentally hazardous substances, liquid, N.O.S. 1 (Dichlorotoluene/Heavy aromatic naphtha; Limonene) Dangerous, Environmentally hazardous substances, liquid, n.o.s. 1 Flammable Grand Total 12

We also reviewed cross-tabulations of origin and destination regions for shipments contained on trucks that were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey. We then identified the number of shipments by origin-destination region, the associated ranking of each O-D region pair, and the percentages of shipments represented for each respective origin and destination. These data are summarized in Table 37. We also examined the number of shipments per truck for each of the O-D region pairs from Table 37 to identify the equivalent number of trucks between the O-D region pairs that were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey, and the mileage between the O-D region pairs. These data are summarized in Table 38. The data from Tables 37 and 38 indicate the following:  At least 113 shipments (60 percent) originated in Texas, 59 of them in El Paso (31percent).  At least 75 shipments (40 percent) had destinations in New Mexico, 55 in Las Cruces (29 percent)  Around 20 percent of shipments (39) and 28 percent of HazMat trucks (30) were traveling between El Paso and Las Cruces.  Shipments originating outside of Texas were primarily coming from the Southeastern U.S., but no particular state dominated shipment origins.  Shipments destined outside of New Mexico were going predominantly to the Los Angeles-San Diego, California region.  Shipments between El Paso, Texas, and New Mexico destinations had a low number of shipments per truck. These were mostly deliveries of bulk liquid fuels. Shipments originating outside of El Paso, Texas tended to have higher numbers of different shipments per truck. These were typically breakbulk shipments of various commodities.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 69

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 37. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: O-D Pairs and Associated Frequencies, Ranks, and Percentages for Shipments on Surveyed Trucks. A&M Percent of Percent of Shipment Shipment All Shipments All Shipments

Transportation Institute Transportation Origin Destination Frequency Rank from Origin to Destination El Paso, TX Las Cruces, NM 39 1 62% 64% Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 17 2 55% 38% Corpus Christi, TX Beatty, NV 14 3 100% 100% El Paso, TX Albuquerque, NM 13 4 21% 93% Houston, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 10 5 53% 22%

Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Las Cruces, NM 9 6 29% 15% El Paso, TX Silver City, NM 7 7 11% 88% Atlanta, GA Phoenix, AZ 5 8 45% 45% Baton Rouge-New Orleans- Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 4 9 100% 9% Gulfport Memphis, TN Las Cruces, NM 4 9 100% 7%

Rio Grande Valley, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 4 9 100% 9% Unknown Unknown 4 9 80% 100% Atlanta, GA Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 3 13 27% 7% Jacksonville, FL Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 3 13 75% 7% Kansas City, MO Las Cruces, NM 3 13 100% 5% Subtotal Above: 139 73.9%

Total Shipments: 188 100%

Page

70

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 38. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: O-D Pairs and Associated Frequencies, Number of Equivalent Trucks, Shipment/Truck Ratios, and O-D Distances for Shipments on Surveyed Trucks. A&M Number of Ratio of Shipment Equivalent Shipments/ O-D Distance

Transportation Institute Transportation Origin Destination Frequency Trucks Trucks (miles) El Paso, TX Las Cruces, NM 39 30.0 1.30 46 El Paso, TX Silver City, NM 7 6.0 1.17 154 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 17 5.0 3.40 1,420 El Paso, TX Albuquerque, NM 13 5.0 2.60 269 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX Las Cruces, NM 9 4.0 2.25 663

Unknown Unknown 4 4.0 1.00 Unknown Houston, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 10 3.0 3.33 1,546 Atlanta, GA Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 3 2.0 1.50 2,218 Baton Rouge-New Orleans- Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 4 1.7 2.40 1,892 Gulfport Corpus Christi, TX Beatty, NV 14 1.0 14.00 1,534

Atlanta, GA Phoenix, AZ 5 1.0 5.00 1,846 Rio Grande Valley, TX Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 4 1.0 4.00 1,592 Jacksonville, FL Los Angeles-San Diego, CA 3 1.0 3.00 2,415 Kansas City, MO Las Cruces, NM 3 1.0 3.00 1,116 Memphis, TN Las Cruces, NM 4 0.8 5.00 1,132 Subtotal Above: 139 66.5

Total Shipments: 188 108

Page

71

We also cross-tabulated the number of shipments by HazMat commodity class for different origin-destination region pairs. These data are summarized in Tables 39 through 46.  Table 39: Nearly all of the HazMat shipments that originated in El Paso, Texas (63), had destinations in New Mexico (61). Most of these destinations were in Las Cruces (39), followed by Albuquerque (13). Over half of the shipments that originated in El Paso were Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids (36), while over a quarter were Class 2 gases (18).  Table 40: Most of the HazMat shipments that originated in the Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas region (31) had destinations outside of New Mexico (22). Most of these destinations were in the Los Angeles-San Diego, California region (17). Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids (11), and Class 8 corrosive materials (9) accounted for around one- third of the shipments, each.  Table 41: All of the HazMat shipments that originated in Houston, Texas (19), had destinations outside of New Mexico. Around half of these destinations were in the Los Angeles-San Diego, California region (10). The largest share of shipments were of Class 8 corrosive materials (7), followed by Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids (5).  Table 42: All of the HazMat shipments that originated in Corpus Christi, Texas (14), were carried on one truck and were destined for Beatty, Nevada. The large majority of these shipments were of Class 8 corrosive materials (12).  Table 43: All of the HazMat shipments that originated in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas, region (4) were destined for the Los Angeles-San Diego, California region. Three of these shipments were of Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids.  Table 44: The majority of HazMat shipments with destinations in Las Cruces, New Mexico (61), had origins in Texas (49). Most of these origins were from El Paso (39), followed by the Dallas-Fort Worth region (9). Over half of the shipments with destinations in Las Cruces were Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids (33), while around 20 percent were Class 8 corrosive materials (14) and Class 2 gases (11).  Table 45: All of HazMat shipments with destinations in Albuquerque, New Mexico (14), had origins in Texas. The large majority of these originated in El Paso (13). More than 70 percent of the shipments with destinations in Albuquerque were Class 2 gases (10).  Table 46: Most of HazMat shipments with destinations in Silver City, New Mexico (8), originated in El Paso, Texas (1). All shipments with destinations in the Lordsburg- Deming, New Mexico region or Silver City, New Mexico were Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids (10).

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 72

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 39. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in El Paso, Texas, by HazMat Class. A&M Non-New Mexico

New Mexico Destinations Destinations

Transportation Institute Transportation Las Lordsburg- Albuquerque, Cruces, Deming, Silver City, Sub- Phoenix, Southeast Sub- Grand HazMat Class NM NM NM NM Total AZ Colorado Total Total 2 - Gases 10 7 17 1 1 18 3 - Flammable and 1 26 2 7 36 36 Combustible Liquids 5.1 - Oxidizers 1 1 1 8 - Corrosives 5 5 1 1 6 9 - Miscellaneous 2 2 2 Hazardous Materials Total 13 39 2 7 61 1 1 2 63

Table 40. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Dallas-Fort Worth, Texas, by HazMat Class. Non-New Mexico Destinations Las Fresno- Los Angeles- Pomona-San San Cruces, Bakersfield, San Diego, Northeast Bernardino, Francisco- Sub- Grand HazMat Class NM CA CA AZ CA Oakland, CA Total Total 2 - Gases 2 1 1 1 3 5 3 - Flammable and 1 8 1 1 10 11 Combustible Liquids 5.1 - Oxidizers 1 1 1 2 6.1 - Toxics and 1 1 1 2 Poisons 8 - Corrosives 4 1 4 5 9 9 - Miscellaneous 2 2 2 Hazardous Materials Total 9 2 17 1 1 1 22 31

Page

73

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 41. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Houston, Texas, by HazMat Class. A&M Non-New Mexico Destinations

South Transportation Institute Transportation Fresno- LA- Pomona- San Fran.- Central Eastern Bakersfield, Las San Diego, Malay- San Bernard., Phoenix, Oakland, Coast, Grand HazMat Class AZ CA Vegas, NV CA sia CA AZ CA CA Total 2 - Gases 1 1 2 3 - Flammable and 1 1 1 2 5 Combustible Liquids 5.2 - Organic Peroxide 1 1 6.1 - Toxics and Poisons 1 1 2 8 - Corrosives 1 5 1 7 9 - Miscellaneous 2 2 Hazardous Materials Total 1 1 1 10 1 1 1 2 1 19

Table 42. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in Corpus Christi, Texas, by HazMat Class. HazMat Class Destination: Beatty, NV 3 - Flammable and 1 Combustible Liquids 8 - Corrosives 12 9 - Miscellaneous 1 Hazardous Materials Total 14

Table 43. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Destinations for HazMat Shipments Originating in the Rio Grande Valley, Texas, by HazMat Class. Destination: Los Angeles-San Diego, HazMat Class CA 2 - Gases 1 3 - Flammable and 3 Combustible Liquids Total 4

Page

74

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 44. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Las Cruces, NM, by HazMat Class. A&M HazMat Class

Transportation Institute Transportation Class 3 - Flammable and Class 6.1 - Class 2 - Combustible Class 5.1 - Toxics and Class 8 - Region of Origin Gases Liquids Oxidizers Poisons Corrosives Total Texas El Paso, TX 7 26 1 5 39 Dallas-Fort Worth, TX 2 1 1 1 4 9 Lubbock, TX 1 1 Subtotal: 9 27 2 1 10 49

Non-Texas Albuquerque, NM 1 1 Atlanta, GA 1 1 Charlotte, NC 1 1 Chicago, IL 1 1 Kansas City, MO 3 3 Memphis, TN 1 2 1 4 San Diego, CA 1 1 Subtotal: 2 6 4 12 Grand Total: 11 33 2 1 14 61

Page

75

Table 45. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Albuquerque, NM, by HazMat Class. HazMat Class Class 3 - Class 9 - Flammable and Miscellaneous Class 2 - Combustible Hazardous Region of Origin Gases Liquids Materials Total El Paso, TX 10 1 2 13 Lufkin-Nacogdoches, TX 1 1 Grand Total: 10 1 3 14

Table 46. Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Data: Frequencies of Origins for HazMat Shipments with Destinations in Lordsburg-Deming, NM, and Silver City, NM, by HazMat Class. HazMat Class 3 - Flammable and Combustible Liquids Lordsburg- Silver City, Region of Origin Deming, NM NM Total El Paso, TX 2 7 9 Lordsburg-Deming, NM 1 1 Grand Total: 2 8 10

6.2.2 Carrier Safety Information

As described for Zaragoza POE, we also evaluated safety-related statistics for trucks that were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey, summarized in Table 47. We obtained DOT registration numbers for 108 of 111 trucks that were included in the shipping manifest survey. OOS ratings for carriers that were higher than national averages over the 2009– 2010 timeperiod are identified in Table 47 using italicized text.

Unlike the shipping manifest evaluation for Zaragoza POE, there were a number of trucks were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey that were owned by carriers with vehicle and driver OOS ratings that were worse than national averages. There were also a number of carriers with HazMat OOS ratings worse than national averages. Together, there were 15 out of 108 trucks for which we obtained DOT registration numbers at Anthony POE, representing 13 different carriers, that had OOS ratings worse than national averages. Five of these carriers had OOS ratings in multiple categories that were higher than national averages.

Although all of the 13 carriers with higher than average OOS ratings had only one or two trucks each that were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey, there appeared to be two predominant types of hazardous materials that were associated with these carriers in the survey. Nine of the trucks had placards for UN/NA ID 1993 or ‘Flammable’ materials, and six of the trucks had placards for ‘Corrosive’ materials or UN/NA ID 3265.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 76

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Table 47. Carrier Safety Information for Trucks from Anthony POE Shipping Manifest Survey. Total

A&M National Inspection % Out of Service Number of Company Inspections Trucks in Transportation Institute Transportation DOT # Company Legal Name 2009-2010 Vehicle Driver Hazmat Sample Placard IDs in Sample 4247 Groendyke Transport, Inc. 2,389 9.41% 0.55% 1.34% 2 1203 7448 Tex-Air Gas Co., Inc. 8 14.29% 12.50% 0.00% 1 1046 16130 Ryder Truck Rental, Inc. 6,483 8.27% 1.46% 1.78% 1 1993 20293 G I Trucking Company 1,264 11.29% 1.32% 7.25% 1 No placard 29124 SAIA Motor Freight Line, LLC 4,260 14.98% 0.76% 3.88% 3 3267, Corrosive, Flammable

36647 Coastal Transport Co., Inc. 1,600 12.33% 0.63% 1.16% 18 1075,1170, 1203, 3257,1993 63391 Greenwood Motor Lines, Inc. 5,079 12.93% 0.74% 4.08% 5 No placards, Dangerous, Class 8, 71821 YRC, Inc. 8,034 18.89% 0.72% 4.97% 1 Corrosive 75063 Mayfield Pool Supply, LP 4 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 No placards 76324 Truserv Logistics Company 433 8.33% 0.93% 2.94% 1 No placards 84338 Superior Carriers, Inc. 1,437 8.72% 0.84% 1.25% 1 3266 86873 Helena Chemical Company 888 12.27% 0.71% 7.61% 1 Flammable 117034 Central Freight Lines, Inc. 1,838 21.02% 2.63% 5.03% 1 Flammable 118390 BJ Cecil Trucking, Inc. 246 10.15% 3.02% 3.64% 1 1830 121058 UPS Ground Freight, Inc. 6,824 13.68% 1.39% 3.65% 2 No placard 134151 Baron Chemical Co., Inc. 7 25.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 Corrosive 146620 Brewer Oil Co. 39 9.38% 0.00% 0.00% 2 1203 149333 Jack B Kelley, Inc. 721 4.82% 0.43% 0.34% 1 1972 172508 Western Refining Wholesale, Inc. 560 7.14% 0.36% 0.90% 4 1202, 1203 185040 United Petroleum Transports, Inc. 1,707 13.52% 1.18% 2.19% 3 1203, 1993 194997 Quality Transport, Inc. 110 10.98% 3.96% 0.00% 1 1830 223430 Argyle Welding Supply Co., Inc. 15 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1 Non-flammable gas 226118 Southern Freight, Inc. 514 15.29% 3.50% 1.63% 1 Oxidizer 239039 FedEx Freight, Inc. 7,011 12.09% 0.69% 4.08% 19 No placard, Corrosive, Dangerous, Flammable, Inhalation hazard, Poison 241572 Landstar Ranger, Inc. 13,866 13.48% 2.43% 1.96% 2 Corrosive, Dangerous, Flammable, Oxidizer Page 241829 Con-Way Freight, Inc. 6,212 10.31% 0.99% 4.36% 1 No placard

77

Texas Research Transportation Intelligent International for Center Total National Inspection % Out of Service Number of A&M Company Inspections Trucks in DOT # Company Legal Name 2009-2010 Vehicle Driver Hazmat Sample Placard IDs in Sample Transportation Institute Transportation 246020 J & M Company 112 1.10% 0.00% 0.00% 1 2201, Non-flammable gas 256308 Trimac Trans. Svcs. Western, Inc. 571 13.45% 1.60% 0.30% 1 1977 273818 Covenant Transport, Inc. 5,221 12.10% 1.31% 2.96% 1 Flammable 282721 American Transport, Inc. 1,322 21.15% 4.79% 6.67% 1 1993 285929 Triad Transport, Inc. 808 13.06% 2.61% 4.30% 3 1942, Corrosive, Flammable, Oxidizer 288323 Autozone Texas, LP 1,463 6.95% 0.14% 0.45% 1 Corrosive

388004 Amerigas Propane, LP 4,146 8.44% 0.81% 1.54% 2 1075 439116 Joseph J Ashe 67 7.27% 0.00% 0.00% 1 1203 454597 Desert Refined Products Transport, Inc. 238 5.83% 0.42% 1.86% 1 1863 540777 Transwood, Inc. 1,116 7.27% 1.26% 0.67% 1 3257 540805 Airgas Southwest 667 3.43% 0.90% 0.47% 1 Flammable gas, Non-flammable gas

549324 Dansk Investment Group 30 22.22% 0.00% 7.69% 1 1993 661173 Central Transport, LLC 3,222 21.26% 1.82% 9.14% 2 Flammable, Non-flammable gas 688633 Linden Bulk Transportation SW, LLC 728 9.39% 4.54% 0.98% 1 3272 726496 Official Fast Freight, LLC 48 15.63% 0.00% 0.00% 1 Corrosive 786781 EQ Industrial Services, Inc. 328 7.46% 2.13% 2.74% 1 1755, 1760, 1826, 1993, Corrosive 824474 Tigua Transportation, Inc. 22 0.00% 9.09% 0.00% 2 1993 913300 Gemini Motor Transport, LP 1,013 1.85% 0.30% 0.00% 1 1993 992406 Chemical Logistics, Inc. 167 11.11% 2.99% 1.53% 1 2014, Corrosive 1258582 LMD Integrated Logistic Services, Inc. 46 0.00% 2.27% 0.00% 1 2921 1296876 Cerchio Enterprise, Inc. 32 22.73% 0.00% 0.00% 1 3265 1384545 RJ Leasing, LLC 30 33.33% 6.67% 0.00% 1 1993 1495193 Bulk Trans, Inc. 125 21.82% 7.20% 4.63% 1 1993 1561741 Xpert Transportation, LLC 117 7.62% 0.85% 1.83% 2 1203 1632012 Southwest Cargo Systems, LLC 168 16.28% 4.76% 3.08% 1 1268 2059502 CGL Transport, LLC 128 5.68% 3.91% 0.99% 1 2014 Total 108

Page National Averages (2009-2010) 20.72% 5.51% 4.50%

78

6.3 SUMMARY FOR ANTHONY POE

The truck traffic that was outbound from Texas to New Mexico on I-10 at the Anthony, NM, Port of Entry included a wide range of different hazardous materials. Truck traffic levels normalized to a period of 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. totaled around 1,730 westbound trucks, and HazMat placarded truck traffic comprised around 4.5 percent of trucks we counted. Around half of the shipments were of Class 3 flammable and combustible liquids, and around 20 percent were of Class 8 corrosive materials. The most frequently observed placards were labeled for UN/NA ID 1203, ‘Corrosive,’ UN/NA ID 1993, and ‘Flammable’ materials.

At least 60 percent of shipments included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey originated in Texas, and half of these originated in El Paso. At least 40 percent of shipments had destinations in New Mexico, two-thirds of these in Las Cruces. Shipments originating outside of Texas were primarily coming from the Southeastern U.S., and shipments destined outside of New Mexico were predominantly going to the Los Angeles-San Diego, California region. Trucks that were traveling between El Paso, Texas, and New Mexico destinations had a low number of shipments per truck. These were mostly deliveries of bulk liquid fuels. Trucks that were travelling from origins outside of El Paso, Texas, tended to have higher numbers of different shipments per truck. These were typically breakbulk shipments of various commodities.

The safety profiles of 13 companies whose trucks were included in Anthony POE shipping manifest survey were worse than national averages for vehicle, driver, and/or HazMat out-of- service ratings. Five of the companies had OOS ratings worse than national averages in multiple categories. Although all of the 13 carriers with higher than average OOS ratings had only one or two trucks each that were included in the Anthony POE shipping manifest survey, there appeared to be two predominant types of hazardous materials that were associated with these carriers in the survey. Nine of the trucks had placards for UN/NA ID 1993 or ‘Flammable’ materials, and six of the trucks had placards for ‘Corrosive’ materials or UN/NA ID 3265.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 79

7 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS

7.1 CONCLUSIONS

While there is strong diversity and industrial capacities that promote of manufacturing and bi-national trade in the El Paso-Juarez region, the types and quantities of hazardous materials that are transported by truck into the U.S. from Mexico at Zaragoza POE are limited, and appear to be relatively stable over time. Bulk HazMat shipments consisted primarily of flammable and non-flammable gases, and comprised mostly empty tank trucks returning to the U.S. after having delivered shipments in Mexico. There were also loaded, inbound bulk shipments by tank truck of hydrofluoric acid, a corrosive, toxic liquid. Non-bulk shipments of hazardous materials into the U.S. from Mexico at Zaragoza POE were primarily airbag modules.

In contrast, the I-10 trade corridor in the El Paso-New Mexico area has a much higher level and greater diversity of HazMat transport. This includes regional deliveries of bulk fuel and shipments of gases to New Mexico, and long-haul bulk and breakbulk shipments of gases, flammable liquids, oxidizers, poisonous and toxic materials, corrosive materials, and miscellaneous dangerous goods. While there are also shipments of radioactive materials over the corridor, there were no shipments of these materials included in our survey.

While we did not examine individual trucks for compliance with safety requirements at either Zaragoza POE or Anthony POE (our survey personnel were not DOT-certified inspectors), we reviewed publicly available information for carriers that owned the trucks that were included in the shipping manifest surveys. Based on those analyses, we did not find much evidence to support the idea of ‘dangerous trucks from Mexico’ that transport hazardous materials into the U.S. at El Paso. There were proportionately more trucks in our survey at Anthony POE associated with carriers that have higher than average FMCSA out-of-service ratings for vehicles, drivers, and hazardous materials, than at the Zaragoza POE. There were also multiple trucks in our survey at Anthony POE associated with carriers that have higher than average OOS ratings in multiple categories. Based strictly on these truck and HazMat traffic data, and carrier safety information, the general likelihood of a HazMat transport incident appears to be greater over the I-10 corridor than at Zaragoza POE. This does not mean however that there is no risk of a HazMat incident at Zaragoza POE.

7.2 RECOMMENDATIONS

7.2.1 Use Project Results

Emergency responders, elected officials, public health and hospital agencies, community and transportation planners, and the general public must be aware of and prepared for the potential of HazMat incidents wherever these types of materials are transported or at fixed facilities where they are stored, produced, or consumed. The reports for a 2012 El Paso Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Study (provided separately to the City of El Paso Fire Department on behalf of the El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee) include suggestions about how responders, elected officials, planners and other public agencies, and the public can use this

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 80

information (15,16). We encourage officials and agencies in the El Paso region to use the information from this study and the 2012 El Paso Hazardous Materials Commodity Flow Study and share the information with other relevant stakeholders. Specific applications for this information include:  Use the information to enhance emergency operations plans and standard operating procedures for response, and informing emergency response training and exercises.  Integrate the information into community and transportation planning, not only to account for transport of hazardous materials, but also commercial vehicle traffic in general. Relevant agencies include local, state, and federal transportation agencies, metropolitan planning organizations, and other municipal and county agencies.  For community-specific impacts, we note that the commodity flow study reports described above included population demographic profiles based on U.S. Census data at block group levels and proximities to major truck and rail corridors. The analysis showed that as proximity to major road and rail infrastructures increase, median household income and level of education decrease, and age and Hispanic ethnicity increase. These factors relate to population risks due to chemical exposures and anticipated responses to emergency warnings such as evacuation and/or shelter-in-place notifications. Agencies that could use this information include response agencies, public health and hospital officials, and municipal and county information offices.

7.2.2 Keep the Data Current

Changes in communities can affect both transport of hazardous materials and population risks of exposure to harmful effects of hazmat transport incidents. For example, the El Paso region is experiencing rapid growth and modernization of its transport infrastructures, for example along I-10 and on Loop 375, which can affect flows of both commercial truck and passenger vehicle traffic. Economic activity is another important consideration. Chapter 2 discussed the growth potential for increased manufacturing activity in the Juarez-El Paso region, as well as effects of intercontinental trade flows. While cross-border HazMat traffic in the El Paso-Juarez region is currently permitted only through the Zaragoza POE, HazMat traffic may be permitted in the future through the Santa Teresa POE. These changes can be expected to alter HazMat flows not only at the ports of entry but also connecting roadway and highway networks. Updates to transportation information sources such as this shipping manifest study are one way to identify changes in hazardous materials flows, and their potential effects on surrounding communities.

7.2.3 Expand the Knowledge Basis

Expanding the basis of knowledge and information can help local communities, states, and the federal government plan for safe and efficient movement of hazardous materials, and minimize negative effects on populations and the environment. Recommendations for future research include projects about hazardous materials transport and potential population effects in the El Paso area, as well as regionally and nationally. Examples of projects include:

1. An expanded shipping manifest study on I-10, for example at Anthony POE. This report summarizes the outcomes of shipping manifest data collection at Anthony POE over 16

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 81

hours during the daytime on four different weekdays during the spring and early summer. This information could be expanded to account for nighttime, weekend, and/or seasonal traffic. Such a study might also include an evaluation of whether commercial vehicles are attempting to bypass truck inspection facilities.

2. Other shipping manifest evaluations could be conducted at other commercial vehicle inspection stations on I-10 in Texas and/or other states. This could expand the available information about both local/regional and long-haul traffic, and help transportation and emergency planners better understand risks and potential traffic impacts along the corridor.

3. These projects could also incorporate results of commercial vehicle inspections by DOT- certified inspectors, as well as driver record-keeping and citation information. While the amount of time required is probably too great to include Level I (Standard) inspections, it might be possible to include Level II (Walk Around/Driver) inspections.

4. In addition, research projects could examine commercial vehicle incident/accident data maintained by the Texas Department of Transportation, as well as other data that might be available for HazMat incidents, and use Geographic Information Systems (GIS) to co- locate these data with information about transportation networks, populations, and critical infrastructures and identify risk ‘hotspots.’

5. Another type of study might focus on the safety management practices of transportation carriers and how these practices affect vehicle maintenance and incident risks. This report identified that HazMat carriers with higher than average out-of-service ratings are operating in the El Paso region. Practices of these carriers could be compared with those who have better safety ratings to identify whether there are systemic factors that drive carrier performance in safety related areas.

6. Section 7.2.1 refers to a general population demographic and transport corridor proximity analysis was conducted using U.S. Census block group data. This type of analysis could be expanded to include U.S. Census microdata (potentially available through the Texas Census Data Research Center at Texas A&M University) and use GIS to identify more- specific demographics (e.g., non-English speaking or English-second-language households) that are potentially at risk.

7. The downtown El Paso area has an extensive network of both elevated and depressed transport infrastructures. There are also industrial facilities and transportation hubs in the area that are potential sources of chemical releases. Analyses of physical infrastructure could inform about potential impacts of toxic plume migrations or explosive blasts as channeled by urban structures (e.g., roadways and buildings) that are not accounted for in chemical release models.

8. Other studies could examine how information about HazMat transportation is integrated into emergency, transportation, and community plans. Using information about population vulnerabilities, for example, emergency preparedness and response planning

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 82

might be able to address responses of vulnerable populations to emergency warning notifications, and ways of communicating risks to those populations.

9. Research on response and planning organizations might address communications and information sharing practices both horizontally and vertically among local, state, and federal agencies. For example, all truck shipments that cross from Mexico into the U.S. are required to file an e-manifest with U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP). The e-manifest is usually filed by the carrier and has to be done one hour prior to arrival at a U.S. land border port of entry, or 30 minutes if the carrier is a participant in the Free and Secure Trade (FAST) program. The e-manifests provide CBP with cargo information such as crew, conveyance, equipment, and shipment details.

Information that is included in the e-manifest is managed by CBP’s Automated Commercial Environment (ACE), and it distributes the information to other federal agencies under a Single Window environment. Federal agencies that are part of the program are called Participating Government Agencies (PGAs), and from the Department of Transportation include the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration (FMCSA), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA), and the Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). The federal agencies receive certain data elements from the e-manifest.

As the e-manifest includes commodity detail, cross-border hazmat shipments could be identified. State and local agencies could work together with the federal agencies to establish the necessary protocols for data sharing. The ACE program has been developed over a long time, and currently state and local agencies are not considered PGAs; however, tracking hazmat in the international border environment is important to local communities and therefore the mechanisms to share information between federal and local agencies should be implemented.

Other research that is currently being conducted by federal agencies and the private sector involves electronic tracking of HazMat shipments. While these data are not generally available to local agencies, it could be a valuable source of information to help identify the particular risks and vulnerabilities that local populations are exposed to. Future research could identify ways of communicating this type of information effectively and efficiently while addressing privacy and security concerns.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 83

REFERENCES

(1) Union Pacific Railroad begins construction of $400 Million rail facility in New Mexico. (2011, August 8). Union Pacific, News Releases website, http://www.uprr.com/ newsinfo/releases/capital_investment/2011/0808_santa_teresa.shtml (2) Instituto Nacional de Estadística y Geografía (n.d.). Información Nacional por Entidad Federativa y Municipios [Data file for Municipio: Juárez, 2010]. Retrieved September, 2012, from http://www3.inegi.org.mx/sistemas/mexicocifras/default.aspx?e=08 (3) Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas, El Paso Branch. (2012, August). Economic update—El Paso. Retrieved from http://www.dallasfed.org/assets/documents/research/update/ep/ 2012/1205epupdate.pdf (4) Fullerton, T.M., & Walke, A.G. (2011, December). Borderplex economic outlook: 2011- 2013. Business Report SR11-1. University of Texas at El Paso. (5) Villa, J.C., & Bujanda, A. (2010, December). Texas international trade corridor plan. Texas Department of Transportation. Retrieved from ftp://ftp.dot.state.tx.us/pub/txdot- info/library/reports/gov/tpp/itcp_2010.pdf (6) Camino Real Regional Mobility Authority. (2008, July). 2008 comprehensive mobility plan: Partners for mobility. Retrieved from http://www.crrma.org/_documents/3%20- %202008%20CMP%20-%20TxDOT%20Powerpoint%20(July%202008).pdf#view=fitH (7) Valdez, D.W. (2011, July 12). Toll-lane, interchange projects not expected to affect commute on Border Highway. El Paso Times. Retrieved from http://www.elpasotimes.com/ci_18456131 (8) El Paso Metropolitan Planning Organization. (2012, September 7). Mission 2035 metropolitan transportation plan update. Retrieved from http://www.elpasompo.org/ MTPDocs/Mission2035MTPUpdate0912_compressed.pdf (9) Instituto Municipal de Investigación y Planeación. (2009). Plan de Desarrollo Urbano Ciudad Juarez 2009. Ciudad Juarez: Instituto Municipal de Investigación y Planeación. (10) El Paso International Airport. (n.d.). Business–Air cargo. Retrieved September, 2012, from http://www.elpasointernationalairport.com/air-cargo.php (11) City of El Paso (n.d.). Welcome to the City of El Paso, Foreign Trade Zone No. 68. Retrieved September, 2012, from http://home.elpasotexas.gov/ftz/ (12) Bujanda, A., Villa, J.C., & Borowiec, J. (2011). Texas-Mexico border airports: System analysis. Prepared for Texas Department of Transportation, Aviation Division. Texas A&M Transportation Institute. (13) Ambiotec Environmental Consultants, Inc. (1998, February). Hazardous materials commodity flow study. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (14) A&B Environmental Services, Inc. (2004, April). Transboundary hazardous material survey for El Paso, Texas. Prepared for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. (15) Bierling, D., Martin, M., Jasek, D., Cutaia, L., & Songchitruksa, P. (2012, September). Hazardous materials commodity flow study: Roadways in El Paso County, Texas. Prepared for the Texas Division of Emergency Management and the El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee. Texas A&M Transportation Institute.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 84

(16) Bierling, D., Jasek, D., Martin, M., Cutaia, L., Lorente, P., & Van Alstyne, M. (2012, September). Hazardous materials commodity flow study: Railways in El Paso County, Texas. Prepared for the Texas Division of Emergency Management and the El Paso County Local Emergency Planning Committee. Texas A&M Transportation Institute.

Center for International Intelligent Transportation Research Texas A&M Transportation Institute Page 85