BridgeTheEvaluation North Load ofAmerican Testing Construction Versus Joint Failure BridgeTransportationin Kentucky Load — Rating A Security Synthesis Center of Past Work ReportReport Number: KTC-19-24/FD01-1FKTC-18-05/SPR15-498-1F KTC-19-16/SPR06-423-1F DOI:DOI: https://doi.org/10.13023/ktc.rr.2019.24https://doi.org/10.13023/ktc.rr.2018.05https://doi.org/10.13023/ktc.rr.2019.16 RAIL ROAD CROSSING ROAD WORK AHEAD Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering, University of Kentucky, Lexington, Kentucky in cooperation with Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Commonwealth of Kentucky TheTheThe KentuckyKentuckyKentucky TransportationTransportationTransportation CenterCenterCenter isisis committedcommittedcommitted tototo aa policypolicy ofof providingproviding equalequal opportunitiesopportunitiesopportunities for forfor al allall persons personspersons in inin recruitment, recruitment,recruitment, appointment, appointment,appointment, promotion, promotion,promotion, payment, payment,payment, training,training, andandand other otherother employment employmentemployment and andand education educationeducation practices practicespractices without withoutwithout regard regardregard for forfor economic, economiceconomic oror socialsocial statusstatusstatus and andand will willwill not notnot discriminate discriminatediscriminate on onon the thethe basis basisbasis of ofof race,race,race, color,color, ethnicethnic origin,origin, nationalnational origin,origin, creed,creed,creed, religion, religion,religion, political politicalpolitical belief, belief,belief, sex, sex,sex, sexual sexualsexual orientation, orientation,orientation, marital maritalmarital status status,status, or oror age. age.age. KentuckyKentuckyKentucky Transportation TransportationTransportation Center CenterCenter CollegeCollegeCollege of ofof Engineering, Engineering,Engineering, University UniversityUniversity of ofof Kentucky, KentuckyKentucky Lexington, Lexington,Lexington, Kentucky KentuckyKentucky in inincooperation cooperationcooperation with withwith KentuckyKentuckyKentucky Transportation TransportationTransportation Cabinet CabinetCabinet CommonwealthCommonwealthCommonwealth of ofofKentucky KentuckyKentucky © 2018©© 20182018 University UniversityUniversity of Kentucky, ofof Kentucky,Kentucky, Kentucky KentuckyKentucky Transportation TransportationTransportation Center CenterCenter Information may no tbe used, reproduced, or republished without KTC’s written consent. InformationInformation maymay notnot bebe used,used, reproduced,reproduced, oror republishedrepublished withoutwithout KTC’sKTC’s writtenwritten consent.consent. KENTUCKYKENTUCKY KentuckyKentuckyKentucky Transportation TransportationTransportation Center CenterCenter • University •• UniversityUniversity of Kentucky ofof KentuckyKentucky TransporationTransporation Center Center KentuckyKentucky 176 176Raymond176 RaymondRaymond Building BuildingBuilding • Lexington, •• LexingtonLexington KY 40506 KYKY 4050640506 • 859.257.6898 •• 859.257.6898859.257.6898 • www.ktc.uky.edu •• www.ktc.uky.eduwww.ktc.uky.edu Research Report KTC-19-24/FD01-1F The North American Transportation Security Center Doug Kreis, Ph.D. Associate Director and Michael Barclay Coldstream Digital Kentucky Transportation Center College of Engineering University of Kentucky Lexington, Kentucky In Cooperation With Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Commonwealth of Kentucky The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors, who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the University of Kentucky, the Kentucky Transportation Center, the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet, the United States Department of Transportation, or the Federal Highway Administration. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The inclusion of manufacturer names or trade names is for identification purposes and should not be considered an endorsement. December 2008 Table of Contents 1.0 Project Overview…………………………………………………………………………………………………………………. 1 2.0 Regulatory & Legislative Drivers……………………………………………………………………..…………………… 5 2.1 How does the Federal government regulate the transportation of hazardous waste and hazardous materials? 2.2 Hazmat security is driving the development of new regulations. 2.2.1 Shippers and carriers of certain hazardous materials must prepare security plans and conduct security training (RSPA). 2.2.2 States must perform security checks before licensing hazmat drivers (DHS). 2.2.3 Carriers of security-sensitive hazardous materials must obtain a hazmat safety permit (FMCSA). 2.2.4 Chemical facility anti-terrorism standards focus on hazmat security (DHS). 2.3 In 2007, TSA assumed the lead federal responsibility for hazmat transportation security rulemaking. 2.4 TSA issued guidance for shippers and carriers of highway security-sensitive materials on June 26, 2008. 2.4.1 TSA’s security recommendations incorporate/enhance earlier DOT guidance. 2.4.2 TSA recommends more stringent security measures for Tier 1 highway security-sensitive shipments. 2.5 The 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (PL 110-53/H.R. 1) requires TSA to take action on hazmat truck tracking. 2.5.1 Earlier legislative initiatives paved the way for PL 110-53. 2.5.2 PL 110-53 requires TSA to develop a hazmat truck tracking program. 2.5.3 PL 110-53 requires DHS to evaluate hazmat truck routes. 2.5.4 TSA plans to expand on the recently completed Hazmat Truck Security Pilot program. 2.6 EPA wants to implement a hazardous waste electronic manifest program. 2.6.1 EPA’s hazardous waste manifest requirements are burdensome and expensive. 2.6.2 Electronic manifests have the potential of generating savings of more than $300 million/year. 2.6.3 EPA wants to build a national hazardous waste e-manifest processing center using a public/private partnership. 2.6.3.1 EPA’s original electronic manifest NPRM in 2001 established basic e-manifest requirements. 2.6.3.2 EPA held a public meeting in May 2004 to discuss the future of its e-manifest program. 2.6.3.3 EPA’s uniform manifest rule and its Cross Media Environmental Reporting Rule (CROMERR) laid the foundation for an e-manifest rule. 2.6.3.4 EPA’s attempt to use GSA’s Share-In-Savings contract program in 2005 was unsuccessful. 2.6.3.5 EPA’s Public Notice (Federal Register April 18, 2006) reaffirmed EPA’s intent to use a public/private partnership. 2.6.3.6 EPA supported an unsuccessful legislative attempt to gain “share-in-savings” type authority (Senate Bill 3871 – 109th Congress September 2006). 2.6.3.7 EPA’s Notice of Data Availability (Federal Register February 26, 2008) reaffirmed EPA’s intent to seek a public/private partnership via e-manifest legislation. 2.6.3.8 Senate Bill 3109, Hazardous Waste Manifest Establishment Act, was introduced by Senator John Thune (R-SD) on June 10, 2008 2.7 The Alliance for Uniform Hazmat Transportation Procedures was established by state agencies to preserve state prerogatives in hazmat registration and permitting. i 2.7.1 Why was the Alliance established? 2.7.2 What is the Uniform Program? 2.7.2.1 The Uniform Program revolves around the “base state” concept. 2.7.2.2 Under the Uniform Program, hazmat carriers must have acceptable safety and operating records. 2.7.2.3 Hazmat fees are allocated using the double apportionment method. 2.7.2.4 What data do Alliance states collect from carriers during registration and permitting? 2.7.3 What requirements does a state have to meet to join the Alliance? 2.7.4 What oversight does the Alliance exercise over member programs? 2.7.5 What are the benefits of state membership in the Alliance? Why is membership lagging? 2.8 How will these regulatory/legislative drivers influence the design and operation of the Transportation Security Center? 3.0 Technology Drivers ……………………………………………………………………………………………..….………… 47 3.1 “Smart Truck” technology, a core component of a hazmat tracking system, is inexpensive and available from numerous vendors. 3.1.1 A GPS receiver and a wireless modem are core building blocks of a “smart truck” system. 3.1.2 The smart truck market is well developed and well served. 3.2 Truck-based asset tracking systems are key components of corporate RFID/supply chain systems. 3.3 IEEE’s 1512 family of XML messaging standards supports intelligent transportation systems. 3.4 Service-oriented architectures integrate business processes. 3.5 The E-Sign law of 2000 gave electronic transactions the same legal weight as paper-based transactions. 3.5.1 Electronic (XFML) forms satisfy public and private digital business needs. 3.5.2 Digital signatures ensure document integrity and prevent signature repudiation by system users. 3.6 Internet-based businesses can be located almost anywhere. 3.7 Business rules engines provide sophisticated analyses of market conditions on a dynamic basis. 3.8 Web-based crisis information management software supports “virtual” operations centers; enhances communication during an incident. 3.9 Agile software development allows project teams to “develop quickly and deliver often”. 3.10 How will these technology drivers influence the design and operation of the Transportation Security Center? 4.0 Lessons Learned (Experience Drivers)…………………………………………………………………………….…… 67 4.1 U.S. Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration - Hazardous Materials Safety and Security Technology Field Operational Test 4.1.1 How was “smart truck” technology deployed in the FOT? 4.1.2 How does “smart truck” technology deployment affect