Executive Summary
The Federal Highway Administration's (FHWA) Office of Freight Management and Operations initiated this study to examine the relationship between freight facilities and the environment. More specifically, the focus of the study is how the environmental review process affects the development or expansion of intermodal freight facilities. Law mandates consideration of both human and natural environmental resources where there is federal involvement in transportation improvements. This involvement can include permitting, loan guarantees, direct federal aid and other activities requiring a "federal action" and apply to public as well as private sector sponsors. The degree that environmental laws are understood, acknowledged, and complied with can affect project schedules, design, and costs.
FHWA employed a case study methodology. Projects were reviewed across the nation for all modes of transportation. FHWA's interests included both projects that had encountered delays as well as those that had successfully completed the environmental review process in a timely manner. The eight selected projects included: one rail/highway facility in Waterville, Maine; four rail/highway/port facilities in Oakland, California, Sears Island/Mack Point, Maine, West Hayden Island, Portland, Oregon, and the FAST Corridor in the Seattle/Tacoma area; and two port/rail facilities in the Long Beach Naval Yard, Long Beach, California and the Alameda Corridor, Los Angeles, California.
The types of intermodal projects captured in this sample were determined largely by whether a federal agency had a funding, approval, or permitting role. The water side of port improvement projects most frequently requires National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews in the form of Environmental Impact Statements and Environmental Assessment due to the Army Corps of Engineers (COE) permitting requirements and expenditures of the Harbor Maintenance Tax for capital improvements, such as dredging. FHW A becomes involved with port improvements through land side access projects including: new access into and out of ports for federal-aid highways, rail/highway grade separations at ports, and installation of Intelligent Transportation System (ITS) technology to improve the efficiency of port-highway interfaces. Inland rail/highway intermodal facilities are mostly owned by railroads and are not as likely to require federal permits and funding, and therefore tend not to trigger NEP A reviews (in the past).
The FHWA evaluated the environmental issues associated with the selected projects and the project's level of success in the environmental review process. The findings are based on data that is restricted to what could be obtained through interviews with a variety of participants on the different projects. The total number of intermodal freight transportation projects currently underway in the United States is unknown. Therefore, this is not a statistical sample of all port, rail, highway, and airport facilities. The information represents a first look at environmental issues affecting development of intermodal freight transportation facilities. Environmental factors identified from the case studies as issues associated with intermodal facility development include, but may not be limited to:
- Air quality,
- Cultural resources,
- Land use compatibility,
- Local transportation,
- Natural resources,
- Noise/vibration,
- Hazardous waste,
- Socioeconomics,
- Environmental Justice
- Water quality
Initial observations that can be drawn from the information reviewed include, but are not limited to the following:
- Intermodal freight transportation projects, depending on federal funds or permits, frequently involve a variety of federal agencies as reviewers or that could that could be directly affected (port improvements and landside access issues).
- Clear communications and early involvement of federal and state agencies are critical to the successful completion of environmental analysis for projects (time, money spent, design of project, etc.)
- Conflicts between state and federal environmental requirements can cause delays on projects but can be overcome with early recognition of issues and agreements among agencies on how to proceed.
- Consideration of environmental resources (including avoidance and minimization of impacts through site selection and design) early in the planning and project design phases can result in simplified environmental review and avoidance of costly delays in project schedules.
- Early coordination with public interests on intermodal freight projects can lead to resolving concerns before they become a problem.
- NEPA streamlining through improved agency consultation may be difficult to achieve on many projects if the regulatory agencies do not have adequate resources to engage in early consultation.
- When questions or disagreements arise over the assumptions behind a project's purpose and need, and alternatives, regulatory agencies do not always have the resources to independently verify cargo projections, market analyses, and facility land use needs.
- Port dredging, land side development, and land side access projects are sometimes covered by separate NEPA documents because funding is not always available to cover all three types of activity simultaneously and because different agencies take the lead on these projects. On a related note, there does not appear to be any regional or national guidance or policies for project sponsor agencies and regulatory agencies to follow when considering the funding, permitting, and environmental review of projects in separate political or planning jurisdictions that compete in the same freight markets.
Additional efforts in this area of environmental review might include the following next steps:
- Further research including more case studies and a better understanding of the numbers of projects that exist to confirm the preliminary conclusions discussed above.
- Further research into how FHWA Division staff considers a project's purpose and need, and alternatives when it is a cooperating or review agency.
- Further research into how other reviewing agencies (e.g., Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, National Marine Fisheries Service, and State Historic Preservation Officers) consider a project's purpose and need and develop alternatives.
- Exploring opportunities for multi-agency project sponsorship and agreements among agencies regarding cooperation on intermodal projects (e.g., COE and FHW A on port improvements and landside access as well as Federal Railroad Administration and U.S. Coast Guard when appropriate).
