**NHS Intermodal Freight Connectors**

A Report to Congress

# Prepared by the U.S. Department of Transportation

July 2000

###### Table of Contents

Executive Summary 2

I. Study Background and Mandate 8

II\. NHS Intermodal Connectors: Their Role in Freight Movement 12

and Emerging Freight Challenges

III\. Condition and Investment Analysis 17

IV\. Critical Issues and Strategic Areas for Intermodal Connectors 28

**Tables**

Table 1: Intermodal Freight Terminals 10

Table 2: Pavement Rating Guide 19

Table 3: Pavement Condition Ratings for Inventoried Connectors 19

Table 4: Poor/Very Poor Pavement Ratings by Terminal Type 20

Table 5: Funding by Source 24

Table 6: Funding by Terminal Type 24

Table 7: Annual Investment Levels Per Mile 25

Table 8: Reported NHS Connector Mileage by Jurisdiction 26

**Figures**

Figure 1: Geometric and Physical Deficiencies

> by Terminal Type 20

Figure 2: Multiple Geometric and Physical Deficiencies

> by Terminal Type 21

Figure 3: Railroad Crossing Deficiencies 22

Figure 4: Traffic Operation and Safety Deficiencies

by Terminal Type 23

**Appendices**

A.  NHS Intermodal Connector Selection Criteria 36

B.  NHS Connector Condition and Investment Inventory Form 39

C.  NHS Intermodal Freight Connector Listing 57

# Executive Summary

Section 1106(d) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st^ Century
(TEA-21) directed the Secretary to conduct a review of the National
Highway System (NHS) freight connectors that serve seaports, airports,
and major intermodal terminals and report to Congress by June 9, 2000.
The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) conducted this study with the
following objectives: (1) evaluate the condition of NHS connectors to
major freight intermodal terminals; (2) review improvements and
investments made or programmed for these connectors; and (3) identify
impediments and options to making improvements to the intermodal freight
connectors.

**Background**

NHS freight connectors are the public roads leading to major intermodal
terminals. The connectors were designated in cooperation with State
Departments of Transportation (DOTs) and Metropolitan Planning
Organizations (MPOs) based on criteria developed by the FHWA and the
U.S. Department of Transportation. The criteria considered the level of
activity of an intermodal terminal and its importance to a particular
State. There are 517 freight-only terminals on the NHS which include 253
port (ocean and river), 203 truck/rail, and 61 pipeline/truck terminals.
In addition to these freight-only terminals, 99 major freight airports,
which handle both passenger and freight, were included in the list of
NHS connectors that were inventoried, for a total of 616 freight
intermodal terminals. These terminals represent 1,222 miles of NHS
connectors.

The NHS carries approximately 75% of commercial truck vehicle miles of
travel. In 1997, trucks moved 58% of total U.S. freight tonnage
representing almost 70% of U.S. freight value. The NHS connectors link
this highway backbone to other modes of transport, creating a national
intermodal freight system and enabling more efficient use of all freight
modes. Despite the fact that connectors are less than 1 percent of total
NHS mileage, they are the "front door" to the freight community for a
broad array of intermodal transport services and options.

Connectors are short, averaging less than two miles in length. They are
usually local, county or city streets and generally have a lower design
than mainline NHS routes, which are primarily Interstate and arterials.
Intermodal connectors serve heavy truck volumes moving between freight
terminals and the NHS, primarily in major metropolitan areas. They
typically provide this service in older, industrialized and other mixed
land use areas where there are often physical constraints or unintended
community impacts.

NHS connectors must meet changing expectations. The U.S. economy is
undergoing dramatic changes, with major evolutions in manufacturing,
trade, finance, telecommunications, and other key sectors. In a
globalized economy, American manufacturers rely on multinational
out-sourcing and production. To remain competitive, they must be able to
efficiently move raw materials, partially assembled products and
finished goods to and from all areas of the world.

Logistics systems must be able to rapidly adjust to changing demand and
inventory levels at each stage of production and distribution around the
globe. Logistics systems increasingly provide just-in-time delivery to
meet production cycles. Connectors are important in defense mobilization
and national security. Because of the increased reliance of the military
on the commercial transportation system, and the lengthening of supply
chains to sustain military units during peacekeeping and other
deployments, intermodal linkage to ports and airports has become an
integral part of national defense planning. The NHS and its intermodal
connectors are an integral part of these new logistics systems.

"Intermodalism" is a service intensive form of transport. The
coordination of freight arrival, staging, and handoff, combined with the
constrained footprints of many freight terminals in dense urban areas,
places a premium on consistent and reliable service. This report
addresses a small, but important component of the Nation's intermodal
freight system. Our Nation's ability to compete globally does not hinge
on the NHS connectors, but our ability to recognize and effectively
address connector needs within the context of our overall intermodal
freight system will have a measurable effect on our international
competitiveness.

#### Study Findings

A comprehensive needs assessment for connectors, similar to the biennial
report to Congress on the Condition and Performance of the Nation's
highway systems, was not possible for this study because a comparable
data system does not exist for connectors. A field inventory of
conditions on the connectors was conducted by FHWA field offices, in
cooperation with States and MPOs, to assess the condition, investment
levels, and impediments related to connector improvements. In addition,
several outreach meetings were conducted to refine and validate survey
findings. Participants at NHS connector outreach meetings and in other
forums, where the results of the study were presented, confirmed these
general findings and provided additional input on their perceptions of
the study results. The results of the survey and outreach follow:

-   Connectors to ports were found to have twice the percent of mileage
    with pavement deficiencies when compared to non-Interstate NHS
    routes. Connectors to rail terminals had 50 percent more mileage in
    the deficient category. Connectors to airport and pipeline terminals
    appeared to be in better condition with about the same percent of
    mileage with pavement deficiencies as those on non-Interstate NHS.
    This may be due to the high volume of passenger travel on these
    roads.

```{=html}
<!-- -->
```
-   Problems with shoulders, inadequate turning radii, and inadequate
    travel way width were most often cited as geometric and physical
    deficiencies with connectors. Data were not available to directly
    compare connectors and other NHS routes with regard to rail
    crossings, lane width, and geometrics. A general comparison of
    functional class attributes suggests that lane width, cross section,
    and geometrics of the connectors would be significantly lower than
    on non-Interstate NHS main routes. This is consistent with the
    differences to be expected between NHS main routes, generally
    principal and minor arterials and connectors, which are often
    functionally classified as collectors or local roads.

-   When the top five terminals with the largest reported investment
    were eliminated from the data-base for each of the terminal types,
    average investment levels were significantly lower than the
    non-Interstate NHS overall. The reported investment levels on all
    connectors were comparable with investment levels on the
    non-Interstate NHS (average/mile). However, most of the investment
    was on a small group of high-profile terminal projects such as the
    Alameda Corridor or the San Francisco Airport.

-   While the analysis showed that the intermodal connectors have
    significantly lower physical and operational characteristics, and
    appear to be underfunded when compared with all NHS mileage, it is
    difficult to determine the magnitude of the problem. There are
    currently no national, regional, or terminal activity level based
    design standards for intermodal access upon which to base a
    conclusive statement on the adequacy of investment. This lack of
    design standards is a significant finding in and of itself.

#### Impediments to Investment

As with all transport needs, funding was the most consistent concern
raised in outreach meetings as a major impediment to implementing needed
freight improvements. The issues with investments on the NHS connectors
are similar to issues with freight investment in general. In this sense,
the NHS connectors are a microcosm of the problems associated with
advancing general freight improvement projects in the State and local
decision-making processes. States and MPOs often see freight as a low
priority when compared with the pressing needs of passenger travel. NHS
connectors are "orphans" in the traditional State and MPO planning
processes. The generally low profile of freight operations in the
community, and the fact that freight operations are conducted by the
private sector, creates challenges for focusing local public sector
interest and resources on freight movement. Consistent with freight
initiatives in general, the challenge for NHS freight connectors is
competition for public transportation funding resources.

MPOs and some States often view a connector as benefiting only a small
segment of its constituent population, with most of the economic and
service benefits dispersed throughout other jurisdictions. Several
States and MPOs have freight advisory committees or similar bodies to
express freight concerns, but the translation of freight planning into a
program of freight projects is problematic. Complex community issues and
environmental concerns surrounding these facilities and the continuing
competition for use of land in and around freight terminals in congested
urban areas, especially along the waterfront, were also raised as
impediments to freight improvements. Compounding this is the lack of
quantitative tools that allow local and State governments to properly
evaluate the economic benefits of freight investment, including NHS
connector investments, to the region and Nation as a whole. The lack of
a constituency to champion connector and other freight oriented
initiatives, combined with the lack of public understanding in the role
these connectors play in the economic health of local communities and
regions, make successful intermodal freight development a challenging
task.

#### Charting a Course for Overcoming Impediments 

Four major issues were identified for further examination in the field
survey conducted by FHWA for this report, and in outreach sessions
involving private sector freight interests, port and airport
authorities, States, and MPOs. The four issue areas are: 1) the need for
increased awareness of the role of the connectors; 2) the examination of
funding options; 3) application of Intelligent Transportation Systems
(ITS) and other technologies to improve the operational linkage of
connectors with terminals and other freight modes; and 4) the community
and environmental issues surrounding connectors and their effect on
improvement options.

The following section identifies several analysis options under each
issue area. The options listed for the following issue areas are not a
definitive list of analysis options. They respond to general concerns
raised in the field survey and in outreach meetings as the appropriate
areas of consideration to enhance NHS connector focus within the
statewide and metropolitan planning and programming processes. They are
included for illustrative purposes only and as a point of departure for
further discussion and examination. *They are not policy
recommendations*.

####### Awareness and coordination

Among the options that might be examined to increase awareness of NHS
connector concerns and improve coordination of various stakeholder
efforts are:

1)  Freight planning incentive grants \-\-- In addition to existing
    State Planning and Research funds (SPR), supplemental grants would
    support States and MPOs who are identifying and planning freight
    projects.

2)  National Truck and Intermodal Network \-\-- In the early 1980s the
    National Truck Network (NTN) was designated. A National Truck and
    Intermodal Network would be an extension of the NTN to major port,
    airport, rail yard, and pipeline terminals that generate high
    volumes of intermodal freight and would convey the significance of
    the connectors to the overall national network.

> 3\) Intermodal connector evaluations \-\-- Federally funded port,
> aviation or roadway studies/projects should include an evaluation of
> the adequacy of the NHS connectors to support projected terminal
> growth and identify any needed infrastructure and operations
> improvements to the connector(s).

***Information Technologies***

Outreach participants noted the need for intermodal applications of ITS
and other advanced technology (referred to as infostructure) to help
provide the information critical to scheduling time dependent intermodal
movements. Freight oriented ITS can play a crucial role in intermodal
system optimization, and forestall some of the infrastructure investment
requirements traditionally cited as solutions for the problems
identified in this analysis. Information technologies can be applied to
make more efficient use of the existing capacity of connectors by
informing drivers of gate queues, railroad crossing closings, road
conditions and delays, best route information and the availability of
loads. In addition, interoperability among information systems must be
addressed. The Federal government should continue to encourage
strategies that integrate the use of infostructure into the operation of
the intermodal connectors and other major freight routes as well. In
this manner, the Federal government can ensure that both the information
and physical requirements for intermodal connectivity are addressed.

####### Funding

The needs and capital requirements of the intermodal connectors vary
exten­sively throughout the country. It is recommended that a full range
of financing mechanisms be investigated, emphasizing innovative
financing options leveraging State/local/private funds. These
include: 1) a new Federal credit program, similar to TIFIA, targeted at
smaller intermodal connector projects; 2) expand the eligibility of the
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing credit program to
include intermodal connector projects; 3) expand or strengthen the State
Infrastructure Banks program, to allow for the capitalization of an
intermodal freight connectors account with Federal‑aid; 4) encourage the
creation of State level credit programs or infrastructure funds for
intermodal freight connector projects; 5) connector incentive grants to
overcome some of the problems encountered by the States and local areas
in funding freight improvements; 6) reducing the match required for
Federal funds where connectors under local ownership do not have the
resources; and 7) a set‑aside of NHS funds for intermodal connector
projects. State and local agency input for any proposed initiative will
be sought through ongoing forums, conferences, etc.

***Community and Environmental Responsiveness***

Environmental protection and community considerations must be integrated
into the development and operation of intermodal connectors. Suggested
analysis options to be examined in planning and project development for
intermodal connectors include:

1\) exploring mechanisms for leveraging transportation investments into
local economic development opportunities; 2) taking into account the
concerns of surrounding communities regarding such issues as truck
traffic, air quality and noise; 3) identifying creative strategies to
meet local, State and Federal environmental requirements;

4\) ensuring appropriate planning and training to enable quick response
to environmental incidents; and 5) identifying funding for host
communities to explore avenues to reduce the localized impacts faced by
the communities surrounding major regional freight terminals and advance
the state-of-the-art for successfully integrat­ing freight movement into
the nation=s landscape and communities.

### Future Direction

FHWA should assess its role in facilitating the movement of freight with
the cooperation and support of those that represent intermodal
perspectives on freight mobility requirements from both private and
public transportation sectors. Also, given the variability in the data
reported for the connectors in the inventory, a more comprehensive
examination of deficiencies and investment options is desirable. This
assessment should be made in consultation with the American Association
of State Highway and Transportation Officials, the Association of
Metropolitan Planning Organizations, the Intermodal Association of North
America, the American Association of Port Authorities, and other carrier
and shipper interest groups to explore options to more effectively
address issues of regional and national concern. This approach will be
useful to all stakeholders in incorporating the needs of the freight
community in the transport project development process. This
comprehensive approach is consistent with other Departmental reviews of
intermodal issues, most recently the Marine Transportation System (MTS)
report submitted to Congress in 1999, which cited the need for
examination of NHS connectors, and the DOT report "Impact of Changes in
Ship Design on Ports and Intermodal Facilities."

# I. Study Mandate and Background

**Study Mandate**

Section 1106(d) of the Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st^ Century
(TEA-21) directs the Secretary to conduct a review of the condition of
and improvements since the designation of the National Highway System
(NHS) connectors that serve seaports, airports, and other intermodal
freight transportation facilities. "In preparing the report, the
Secretary shall review the connectors and identify projects carried out
on those connectors that were intended to provide and improve service to
an intermodal facility and to facilitate the efficient movements of
freight, including movements of freight between modes. If the Secretary
determines on the basis of the review that there are impediments to
improving the connectors serving intermodal facilities, ...the Secretary
shall make any appropriate recommendations as part of the Report to
Congress."

The FHWA conducted this study with the objectives to: 1) evaluate
highway infrastructure condition of NHS connections to major freight
intermodal terminals; 2) review improvements and investments that have
been made or are programmed for the connectors; and 3) identify
impediments to making improvements to the intermodal freight connectors
and approaches to overcoming the impediments. NHS connectors to
intermodal passenger facilities were not specified in Section 1106(d) of
TEA-21, and are not a part of this study.

**Background**

The Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA)
created a new policy framework for addressing national infrastructure
into the 21^st^ century. For the first time, intermodal policy was
established as a cornerstone of Federal surface transportation programs.
ISTEA made it national policy to "encourage and promote development of a
national intermodal transportation system in the United States to move
goods and people in an energy efficient manner, provide the foundation
for improved productivity growth, strengthen the Nation's ability to
compete in the global economy, and obtain the optimum yield from the
Nation's transportation resources."

ISTEA called for the establishment of the NHS. It specified that the
"purpose of the National Highway System is to provide an interconnected
system of principal arterial routes which will serve major population
centers, international border crossings, ports, airports, public
transportation facilities, and other major travel destinations; meet
defense requirements and serve interstate and inter-regional travel." As
part of the effort to establish the NHS, American Association of State
Highway and Transportation Officials, the State Departments of
Transportation (DOTs) and the MPOs, in cooperation with the Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), identified intermodal terminals that
warranted

connection to the NHS. The NHS system includes the Interstate Highway
System, the defense Strategic Highway Network (STRAHNET) and its
connectors to military installations and strategic transportation hubs
and other principal arterials identified in cooperation with the States
and MPOs.

While there was an attempt to serve major intermodal terminals, there
was little public sector knowledge of intermodal facilities, minimal
guidance, and widely varying approaches taken in defining major
intermodal facilities by the States. The task of identifying intermodal
terminals with any consistency among States proved difficult. By the
time the proposed National Highway System was submitted to Congress in
late 1993, the FHWA and the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT)
realized that the effort in this area was inadequate and that the task
of identifying connectors needed to be revisited.

Two years later, when Congress passed the NHS Designation Act of 1995,
it directed the Secretary of Transportation to submit a revised list of
intermodal connectors to Congress. To avoid the initial problems
encountered in designating connections between intermodal terminals and
the NHS, FHWA worked in cooperation with the States and MPOs to develop
guidelines for the designation of intermodal connectors. In April of
1995, FHWA issued *Guidelines for Identifying National Highway System
Connectors to Major Intermodal* *Terminals.*[^1] These guidelines,
outlined in Appendix A, specify the designation criteria for both
nationally significant facilities and for facilities important to a
particular State. The guidelines include criteria for both freight and
passenger intermodal facilities for completeness even though passenger
facilities are not part of this study.

The primary criteria for defining a "major" intermodal freight connector
is activity level (i.e. truck or freight volumes). A major freight
intermodal terminal must generate enough truck traffic (e.g. 100 trucks
per day in each direction) on one or more of the principal routes
serving an intermodal facility, to be considered nationally significant.

Secondary criteria considered the importance of an intermodal facility
within a specific State. That criteria permitted the designation of
intermodal terminals that handled more than 20 percent of freight or
passenger volumes by mode within a State and had a significant volume
arriving and departing on the NHS connector (rather than primarily being
a transshipment terminal). Also, included under the secondary criteria
were intermodal terminals recognized by the State or MPO as an important
facility and targeted for major investments to handle expanding traffic.

Based on these guidelines, connections to 1407 major freight and
passenger terminals were identified by the States and MPOs based on the
criteria established by DOT, totaling 2032 miles. The list of freight
connectors, along with passenger terminal connectors, was submitted to
Congress in May of 1996. TEA-21, enacted June 9, 1998, designated the
intermodal connectors as part of the NHS. In addition, the Congress
directed FHWA to conduct a study of the conditions on NHS intermodal
freight connectors, emphasizing the crucial role that the connectors
play in our Nation's intermodal freight transportation system.

Table 1 shows the number of freight connectors by terminal type. There
were 517 freight terminals (river and ocean port, rail, and pipeline).
In addition, 99 major freight airports, most of which handle both
passenger and freight, were identified in cooperation with FAA. There
were a total of 1,222 miles of roadway inventoried by the States for 584
connectors. Some high volume terminals warranted multiple connectors
while others terminals had direct connections to the NHS with zero
mileage for connector length. A listing of freight intermodal connectors
by State is included in Appendix C.

## Table 1: INTERMODAL FREIGHT TERMINALS

  ------------------------------------------ --------------- ------------
  **Connector Type**                         **Terminals**   **Miles**

  Ports (ocean and river)                    253             532

  Airports                                   99              221

  Truck/Rail Terminals                       203             354

  Pipeline/Truck Terminals                   61              115

  **Total Number of NHS Freight Terminals**  **616**         **1222**
  ------------------------------------------ --------------- ------------

#### 

#### Strategic Planning 

In full recognition of these concerns for national security and
international competitiveness, U.S. DOT and FHWA have adopted strategic
planning initiatives that articulate our Nation's vision for intermodal
transport and point the direction for program initiatives to fulfill
this vision.

The U.S. Department of Transportation seeks to "serve America by
ensuring a safe, efficient, accessible, and convenient transportation
system that meets our vital national interests and enhances the quality
of life of the American people, today and into the future."[^2] FHWA=s
vision is "to create the safest and most efficient and effective highway
and intermodal transportation system in the world for the American
people..."[^3]

The U.S. DOT Strategic Plan focuses on mobility, safety, economic growth
and trade, the human and natural environment and national security.

II\. NHS Intermodal Connectors: Their Role in Freight Movement and
Emerging Challenges

### NHS Intermodal Connector Role in Goods Movement

NHS intermodal connectors are critical components of the Nation=s
freight system that tie modes together and facilitate distribution of
products to users. They are key links integral to achieving a U.S.
transportation system that will seamlessly move goods within regions,
across the country and throughout the world.

They are relatively short, averaging less than two miles, and are
usually local, county or city streets designed to lower standards
because they carry less volume at lower speeds than the typical mainline
NHS route (primarily Interstate and Principal Arterial). These
connectors, however, must be able to handle heavy large trucks moving
between the terminals and mainline NHS system or to other terminals for
transfer to other modes (i.e. from port to rail yard). Those in poor
condition or those that have design deficiencies can slow freight
movement, damage goods in transit, decrease efficiency and negatively
impact safety. A well-designed and maintained intermodal connector will
allow freight to move efficiently to and from the terminal.

Intermodal connectors, as part of the overall freight system, carry the
full range of commodities, from high value container shipments to low
value, bulk moves. They carry items found in retail stores, the
materials used in factories and hospitals, the supplies and express,
overnight packages for offices and businesses, crops from farms, forests
and orchards, coal and petroleum products, etc. While the movement of
freight provides the essentials for daily living, freight movements
(primarily trucks) often conflict with local vehicular traffic and
compete for roadway space.

#### NHS Intermodal Connector Role in Military Deployments

The intermodal connectors also support defense mobilization and national
security. The military is becoming more reliant on the commercial
transportation system, utilizing ports, airports, rail and highways to
transport supplies and personnel in both peacetime and mobilization
efforts. DOD is already a major user of commercial services, spending
\$2 billion annually on freight services alone. Further, the military
anticipates that it will rely on commercial providers for 90 percent of
its peacetime movements and 85 percent of its wartime movements.[^4]

Looking into the future, DOD has a requirement that by 2001 the military
must be able to respond to two geographically divergent major regional
contingencies, each the size of Desert Storm, at nearly the same time.
This translates into the need to ship 7,000 containers a week, along
with troops and rolling stock movements B most of which will move
through the NHS intermodal freight connectors. Over 3.5 million tons
were moved as part of Desert Storm/Desert Shield, which is roughly the
equivalent of moving the entire city of Atlanta (people, their
belongings and cars) half way around the world. National defense
mobilization and deployment is increasingly reliant on the NHS
connectors to project U.S. military power abroad to meet the challenges
of regional conflicts and other defense missions. With redeployment of
U.S. military units stateside, logistics supply lines are longer and
each portion of the line is expected to meet time sensitive mobilization
requirements.

**Emerging Issues and Changes in the Freight Industry**

The NHS connectors face a series of critical issues and challenges in
the 21^st^ century. Industry changes frame the overall business context
under which the intermodal connectors are developed and operated. Within
that business context, there are issues specific to the development and
operation of the intermodal connectors. The freight industry and the
intermodal movement of goods are undergoing radical changes. Intermodal
connectors will need to be responsive and flexible as distribution and
logistics strategies evolve and new technologies, equipment and vehicles
are deployed. These changes will affect route and mode selection and the
amount and composition of freight and vehicles moving over the NHS
connectors. The major changes reshaping freight transportation are
business practices and the qualities sought in freight transportation
services.

The remainder of this Chapter is summarized from an FHWA-commissioned
report "The Role of the National Highway System Connectors: Industry
Context and Issues". It identifies some of the overarching changes in
the U.S. freight industry and business models that will create future
challenges for the NHS connectors and the Nation's ability to harness
and use its freight infrastructure in a seamless manner to meet customer
requirements.

***Changing Business Practices***

In the past few decades, the U.S. economy has undergone changes as
dramatic as those that took place during the industrial revolution.
These changing business practices are a reflection of major evolutions
in key economic sectors, such as manufacturing and trade. Much of this
restructuring occurring in the way businesses operate was not only
brought about by transportation efficiencies but is increasingly
dependent on it.

***[Restructuring of traditional manufacturing and
globalization:]{.underline}*** To maintain competitive advantage,
manufacturers are continually searching for opportunities to restructure
their operations. They are consolidating production at fewer and lower
cost locations, and reducing inventory-carrying costs by limiting
inventories of supplies and parts used in manufacturing and moving
production directly into supply chains with

minimal delay. This downsizing and restructuring has required them to
modernize their manufacturing and distribution systems to become far
more efficient and reliable than in the past.

In our global economy, American manufacturers increasingly rely on
multinational production. They must be able to efficiently move raw
materials, partially assembled products and finished goods to and from
all areas of the world to remain competitive. Logistics systems must be
able to rapidly adjust to changing demand and inventories during the
various stages of the production and distribution cycle around the
globe. The NHS connectors are an integral part of these new logistical
systems.

***[Production runs and just-in-time (JIT) delivery:]{.underline}*** As
the value of products have increased, one way to lower overall costs has
been to reduce the amount of inventory on hand both in production and
distribution. With the uncertainty of demand levels resulting in larger
or smaller-than-required inventory levels at certain times in the
economic cycle, manufacturers have adopted techniques that permit rapid
adaptation to changes in demand. An important factor in reducing overall
costs is to achieve a delicate balance between maintaining an adequate
inventory and the volume of production runs of the same product.

Responding to specialized consumer preferences and tastes, manufacturing
now involves smaller, shorter production runs. Companies have adopted
techniques that permit the production of a variety of goods with the
same production line aimed at various market segments. These new
production processes require the ability to receive inputs just in time.

This emphasis on reduced inventory levels, requires more frequent,
smaller shipments. The transportation infrastructure B including the
connectors B must be able to function reliably, so that businesses can
count on their deliveries being on time, with minimal delays due to
congestion at or near intermodal terminals.

***[E-commerce:]{.underline}*** The development of new computer and
Internet technologies has created a revolution in how businesses
communicate and consumers shop. For example, the *1998/1999 Boeing World
Air Cargo Forecast* noted that "consumers are increasingly using the
Internet for home and business purchases, fueling growth in air/truck
logistic networks."[^5] Statistics from the 1999 holiday season confirm
this trend B an analysis by VISA estimates that "Internet shoppers using
its cards spent \$1.47 billion this November and December, 179 percent
more than in those months last year."[^6] Similarly, a New York
Times/CBS News poll found that 17 percent of the adults surveyed bought
gifts over the Internet compared with seven percent in 1998.[^7] But
even more significant is emerging business to business e-commerce.
Linking businesses with suppliers is introducing more choices and
competition, thereby creating savings in their purchases.

The success of e-commerce rests not only with the Internet but also on
the ability of the transportation system to deliver the goods ordered
quickly and as promised and also making returns convenient and prompt.
Accordingly, e-commerce relies heavily on an efficient, seamless freight
transportation system.

***Qualities Sought in Freight Transportation Services***

The increasingly competitive environment in which firms must operate has
fundamentally altered the use of freight transportation services and
infrastructure. Businesses view freight transportation as a means for
providing better service to customers, supporting their operations and
for increasing efficiency as well as controlling overall costs.
Businesses make decisions on freight transportation in terms of what
they achieve for their firms, not as simply trucks, trains, vessels and
aircraft. In fact, the actual physical movement and routing of cargo is
increasingly likely to be handled by a third party logistics provider
(3PL) on behalf of the firm. The 3PLs are managers of the flow of goods
as they pass from origin to destination through inventory, transport,
and distribution, including documentation and related material control
services, on behalf of the customer. Firms seek to balance the following
qualities in their freight transportation service B overall cost vs.
reliability, transit time, efficiency and damage minimization.

For example, to reduce the overall cost of production, a manufacturer
can reduce inventory costs of parts needed in a production run with a
marginal increase in transportation cost. This can only be achieved if
transportation costs remain low and they are assured that the components
arrive on time. A missing part for an assembly line could halt a
production line. Since many firms no longer stockpile large inventories,
the manufacturer must rely on the transportation provider as well as a
reliable transportation system (e.g. congestion/incidents) to deliver
the components when needed.

Inventory control has evolved into the concept of JIT delivery to reduce
inventory and overall production costs. Reliability of delivery times is
often written into contracts with transportation providers for exacting
specifications B requiring specific delivery schedules close to 100
percent of the time. For transportation providers, meeting time definite
service requirements can impact the modes and routes used. Because of
the potential costs of shutting down a production line due to a late
delivery, penalties can be severe, ranging from monetary fines to loss
of the work.

Cost vs. transit time is always a consideration in freight movement, as
firms try to minimize the cost for moving goods. However, there are
tradeoffs regarding cost and transit time. For example, high-value or
time-sensitive freight will most likely travel by higher cost air or
truck transportation to avoid in-transit inventory costs, where as low
value, high volume/weight cargo will travel by cheaper ship or rail.
Efficiency is achieved when optimally using transportation equipment and
modes so as to minimize transit time and costs. Shippers usually focus
on the overall costs of moving a shipment from origin to destination,
regardless of the number of modes involved and while relying on the
transportation provider to achieve efficiency. Also, since damaged cargo
is of little use, shippers and transportation providers must assure
damage minimization and safety. Conditions on intermodal connectors,
including pavement, road geometry, and security all affect damage
minimization and safety. Carriers and customers look at overall
reliability, cost and time of the total trip from origin to destination.

***Intermodal Connectors in Chicago:***

Intermodal connectors in Chicago are essential links in ensuring the
efficient movement between intermodal terminals and between terminals
and customer, suppliers and factories. These essential movements must
take place in a highly developed and congested urban setting, where
roadways are also used for local goods movement and passenger
transportation. The eastern and western railroads meet in Chicago,
making it the leading railroad transportation hub in the country:

! containing 27 major rail yards;

! performing 5.5 million annual lifts;

! consisting of 10.3 million twenty-foot-equivalent containers (TEUs);

! generating 14,200 daily truck moves related to distribution and
re-distribution of trailers and containers.[^8]

International and domestic goods move through these rail yards. However,
the major railroads are not interconnected, requiring containerized
cargo to be trucked between rail yards. Local and regional distribution
takes place from these rail yards, generating thousands of truck trips
to and from suppliers, factories and customers. Bulked rail cars are
transferred at the Chicago Belt Railway yard, but intermodal trains
require the containers to be transferred by rubber tire. In addition,
residents and businesses along the route must endure the trucks and
congestion associated with its existence. Fifty-five of the 616
intermodal terminals are in Chicago. This presents a unique challenge to
the State and local officials.

Further, the development, operation and maintenance of the connectors
serving the rail yards are largely the responsibility of the
municipality, which must consider all of the transportation needs in
Chicago. This situation demonstrates the need for collaboration among
public sector agencies and the private freight sector stakeholders who
operate the intermodal terminals and transport cargo via the NHS
connectors. All must work together to ensure the efficient and seamless
movement of freight. FHWA has funded a special study in Chicago to bring
together all the parties to develop a process for identifying Connector
needs and advancing priorities into the programming process.

**III. Condition and Investment Analysis**

Data needed to respond to the requirements of the study objectives were
identified for the following categories: physical condition,
investments, and the investment process, including an assessment of
impediments to making needed improvements on the NHS connectors. A
preliminary review of available data sources and information revealed
little consistent and reliable information on the connectors. This was
primarily because NHS connectors were only recently designated and
existing data systems were in the process of incorporating them. Because
of this fundamental lack of objective information, and because of the
variety of NHS connectors under review, FHWA undertook a field inventory
of the connectors.

A sampling approach to data collection was considered, but since most
States had fewer than 10 connectors, it was decided that all the
connectors would be inventoried. Also, because of the way different
types of intermodal terminals are operated, their ownership, eligibility
for federal funding and their treatment in the planning process, data
were collected and analyzed by terminal type (port, airport, railhead
and pipeline terminal). Because of the general lack of available
information and the possible burden on FHWA field offices, the field
inventory form was designed to be completed with available data or on a
single field visit. A draft inventory form was developed, field tested,
and a focus group was convened to provide input before the inventory
form was finalized. The inventory form, including detailed item by item
instructions, is included in Appendix B.

The inventory form was developed in cooperation with key individuals
with experience and expertise in terminal access issues from the Federal
Railroad Administration, the Office of the Secretary, the Maritime
Administration, State DOTs, MPOs, terminal operators, and FHWA field
staff. A steering group comprised of representatives from these
organizations was convened for input on the study approach and data
availability. Industry representatives from the American Association of
Port Authorities (AAPA), the Intermodal Association of North America
(IANA), American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, the National Industrial Transportation League and the
Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations (AMPO) were also
consulted and provided their views on the study conduct.

**Field Data Collection**

The FHWA Division Offices, located in each State, were assigned the task
of data collection. The field data collection for physical conditions
relied heavily on the observations and judgment of the data collector.
The reporting of investment data also requested an evaluation of the
planning and programming processes at the statewide and metropolitan
levels to identify impediments to making improvements on the connectors.
Our FHWA Division Offices conducted this effort in cooperation with the
State DOTs and MPOs.

While the study focused on the recently approved NHS connectors, there
were some States that had connectors "previously approved" in the
initial 1995 designation of the NHS. These facilities, because they were
already serving as connectors to major intermodal terminals, were not
part of the connector designation process initiated in 1996 and were
never designated as "NHS connectors". Since the study was directed at
designated connectors, they are not a required part of the study.
However, stakeholders requested that "previously approved"
connector-like facilities be treated as regular connectors and included
in the inventory. Relatively few connector-like facilities were not
included in the inventory.

Data collection procedures varied from State to State depending on the
availability of information on hand and the cooperation of the States
and MPOs. Much of the information was obtained from existing data
sources maintained within the State DOTs, MPOs and local jurisdictions.
In most cases, some on-site visits were needed to supplement these
available sources. Where on-site visits were necessary, a team approach
involving FHWA Division, State DOT, MPO, local jurisdiction and terminal
operator representatives was used. The team approach was adopted as the
preferred way to obtain the required information in a cooperative
manner. Also, because of the reluctance of some terminal operators to
provide proprietary input that might become public, it was agreed that
the results for individual connectors would not be published.

Information on investments was critical to the study. There were
difficulties, however, associated with getting complete investment data,
especially where local and private sector funding was involved.
Metropolitan Transportation Improvement Programs (TIPs) and Statewide
Transportation Improvement Programs (STIPs) were the primary source of
information for planned improvements to the connectors in the next three
years. Since not all improvements are listed as separate projects on the
TIPs and STIPs, projects had to be supplemented with input from local
agencies or private sources, or discussions with terminal operators
where possible.

### Analysis of Physical Infrastructure

The on-site inventory looked at the physical condition of the
connectors. There were four major areas: 1) Pavement condition; 2)
Geometric and physical features; 3) Railroad crossings; and 4) Traffic
operations and safety. Much of the analysis is based upon the
engineering judgement in the field inventory on the adequacy of service
the connectors were providing for truck traffic. The percents given in
the analyses are the percent of miles determined inadequate in the field
inventory.

**[Pavement Condition]{.underline}**

The rating of pavement was broken into five categories and is primarily
based on an assessment of the influence of the speed at which a
commercial truck can comfortably travel. The pavement rating guidance is
shown in Table 2.

**Table 2**

**Pavement Rating Guide**

  ----------- -----------------------------------------------------------
  Very good   Newly built or resurfaced and distress free.

  Good        Smooth surface with little to no cracking or rutting.

  Fair        Serviceable with shallow rutting and moderate cracks
              beginning to occur, but does not affect travel speed on the
              connector.

  Poor        Same problems as fair but worse, causing some reduction in
              speed.

  Very poor   Major problems with potholes etc., causing substantial
              reductions in speed.
  ----------- -----------------------------------------------------------

Pavements rated as poor and very poor are the most important for
purposes of physical assessment. Pavements rated in these categories
cause reductions in the speed and efficiency of commercial vehicles
using a facility and may also damage the vehicle and its contents.
Because of the effect of poor and very poor pavements on speed, they are
considered past due for resurfacing. Very poor pavements will generally
require full pavement reconstruction to restore serviceability.

The pavement condition data from the inventory were grouped in the
following categories: very good/good, fair, and poor/very poor. Table 3
shows the percent distribution by these categories for all connectors
inventoried.

**Table 3**

**Pavement Condition Ratings for Inventoried Connectors**

(% Connector Mileage)

> Very good/good 51%

Fair 37%

Poor/Very Poor 12%

For All NHS Mileage - Poor/Very Poor 8%

By way of comparison, an estimated 8 percent of all NHS mileage reported
through the Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) was rated as
poor/very poor. Table 4 shows poor/very poor pavement condition by
terminal type.

**Table 4**

**Poor/Very Poor Pavement Ratings by Terminal Type**

[Terminal Type Poor/Very Poor]{.underline}

Airports 7%

Truck/Pipeline 7%

Ports (ocean and river) 15%

Truck/Rail 12%

Poor/Very Poor pavement condition ratings by terminal type show airport
and pipeline terminal connectors with a slightly better than average
ratings of 7 percent (vs. 8 percent for all NHS). Significantly worse
than the NHS average of 8 percent are connectors serving rail/truck
terminals with a 12 percent poor/very poor rating and coastal and river
ports with a 15 percent poor/very poor rating. This is likely due to the
fact that most of the ports and all the rail facilities are privately
owned terminals and their intermodal connectors are primarily serving
truck traffic to these facilities. Airport connectors have a
satisfactory rating (when compared with the all NHS average) probably
because they are primarily serving passenger traffic with relatively few
trucks.

**[Geometric and Physical Features]{.underline}**

\`

A list of physical features was evaluated, as part of the field
inventory, for deficiencies. Inadequate shoulder width, turning radii,
lack of stabilized shoulders and inadequate travel way width were the
most prevalent problems found. The top 5 problems by terminal type are
shown Figure 1.

**Figure 1**

**Geometric and Physical Deficiencies by Terminal Type**

![](media/image1.png)

Problems with the shoulders showed the highest frequency of problems for
geometric and physical inadequacies. Inadequate shoulder width
identifies roadways with insufficient width or strength to accommodate a
parked truck without hindering traffic flow. Often trucks are required
to wait outside terminal gates prior to the terminal opening or during
congested periods of the day or they may have to stop for safety or
other reasons. The lack of shoulders for parking can cause partial
blocking of a travel lane when a truck parks or is disabled, which is
both an operations and a safety concern. Lack of stabilized shoulders
can also cause roadways to wear prematurely due to frequent truck
loadings at pavement edge and the transfer of stresses to adjacent
unconsolidated shoulder material, thereby undermining the main paved
surfaces at the edge and accelerating wear on otherwise normally
adequate pavements.

"Tight turning radii" will force trucks to make wide turns into adjacent
lanes or onto curbs to negotiate an intersection due to obstructions at
the corner. This presents an operations problem because of the delays
caused by the truck maneuver as well as a safety hazard. Tight turning
radii also result in physical damage to roadways, poles, curbs, and
gutters and increases vehicle operating costs due to the cumulative
damage to trucks.

Inadequate travel way width suggests that the roadway width is not
adequate for two-way truck traffic, imposing safety and operational
deficiencies to vehicles using the facility and for adjacent land uses
such as on-street parking for residential and commercial properties.
Drainage problems typically occur in low-lying areas, primarily
approaching coastal and inland ports, where periodic roadway flooding
was cited as a significant problem. In many cases, more than one
physical deficiency was noted. As shown in Figure 2, most connectors had
multiple geometric and physical deficiencies.

**Figure 2.**

**Multiple Geometric and Physical Deficiencies by Terminal Type**

![](media/image2.png)

Almost half the terminals have at least 2 deficiencies and 10-20 percent
show 3 or more deficiencies. Any one of these conditions is a problem
where frequent truck traffic is present.

**[Railroad Crossings]{.underline}**

Because of the presence of active railroad crossings near or adjacent to
most freight terminals and their possible impact on safety and potential
to cause traffic operational problems, they were evaluated as a separate
category. There were 250 connectors with active crossings and half of
those had railroad crossing inadequacies. These are shown in Figure 3.

**Figure 3.**

**Railroad Crossing Deficiencies**

![](media/image3.png)

The most common railroad crossing deficiencies were rough crossing
profiles and delays at crossing (28 to 39 percent of crossings). Rough
crossing profiles are created by uneven surfaces between the roadway and
the rail track, causing trucks to slow significantly to avoid damage to
cargo and vehicle. Delays at crossings (19 to 25 percent of crossings)
occur when train movements in and around terminals create interferences
with highway movements. This interference often extends several blocks
due to the length of trains, and impacts movements throughout the local
area. Other identified deficiencies included substandard crossing
warning devices and lack of alternative routes if blocked by a train
(extended delays where a train blocks all access routes to the
facility). Lack of alternate routes, delays at crossings and
switching/make-up operations could seriously affect the operation of a
terminal by blocking a connector completely. The remaining items
indicate a significant number of unsafe or substandard crossings.

**[Traffic Operations and Safety]{.underline}**

Over half of the freight connectors exhibited safety and/or operational
problems. Figure 4 shows these deficiencies by terminal type. Heavy
traffic, difficulty making turns and lack of turning lanes were the most
prevalent problems causing congestion on the connectors. Delays at
traffic signals, on-street parking conflicts, truck queues at facility
gates, frequent accidents, and lack of signals are also shown.

**Figure 4**

**Traffic Operations and Safety Deficiencies by Terminal Type**

![](media/image4.png)

**[Investment Information]{.underline}**

Information on improvements and investments made were reported for the
three-year period prior to the inventory and for the next three years
following the inventory. The first 3-year period, "past 3-years", began
when the connectors were designated in November 1995 and ended with the
inventory in 1998. The "next 3-year" period (1999 to 2001) is for
projects and investments programmed for the three years following the
inventory. Investment levels by terminal type and funding source were
compiled from available State and MPO programming documents and other
available sources.

Table 5 shows funding by source. It shows significant increases
programmed for the next three years, relative to the previous three
years. This most likely reflects overall program authorizations made
available through TEA-21, which increased Federal funding by 40 percent
relative to ISTEA, and increased recognition by the States and MPOs of
the connectors in the planning and programming process. These are
estimates and should not be construed as a census of all connector
expenditures.

**Table 5**

**NHS Connector Funding by Source (\$ millions)**

#########  Past 3‑Years Next 3‑years

> [1995 -- 1998 1999 --2001]{.underline}
>
> Federal \$231 \$457
>
> State \$ 82 \$263
>
> Local \$134 \$189
>
> [Private \$135 \$ 40]{.underline}
>
> Total \$582 \$949

The amounts by terminal type are shown in Table 6. While a significant
increase in spending is apparent, it is abstract without knowing what is
an adequate level of investment. To make a comparison with investment
levels on the NHS mainline facilities, the annual investments were
calculated on a per-mile basis.

**Table 6**

**NHS Connector Funding by Terminal Type (\$ millions)**

> [Past 3‑years Next 3‑years]{.underline}

######## Airport \$230 \$247

> Pipeline \$ 19 \$ 32
>
> Port \$208 \$401
>
> [Truck/Rail \$125 \$269]{.underline}
>
> Total \$582 \$949

The above funding amounts shown appear to be improving, however, they do
not represent what is actually occurring on the vast majority of
connectors. For example, the Alameda Rail Corridor and the San Francisco
Airport Connector are complex, extensive improvements to local networks
that are not representative of investment activity on a typical
connector. When the top five (for each terminal type) of these types of
cost-intensive projects are removed from the database of NHS connector
investments, the results change significantly.

Table 7 shows annual investments per mile by terminal type for three
years beginning in 1995 (through 1998) and programmed for the following
three years (1999-2001). When looking at average annual investments of
\$102,100 per mile on all non-Interstate NHS routes, the investment
levels for the NHS connectors in the first column compare favorably.

**Table 7**

**Annual Investment Levels Per Mile**

> [Terminal Type Past 3‑Year Past 3-Year (W/out Top 5)]{.underline}
>
> Airport \$346,900 \$ 78,900
>
> Pipeline \$ 55,400 \$ 11,600
>
> Port \$136,100 \$ 40,600
>
> Truck/Rail \$117,800 \$ 65,600

***Average for All Non-Interstate*** ***NHS Mileage \$102,100/mile***

### 

The final column in Table 7 shows three-year investments since 1995
without the top five projects for each terminal type reporting the
highest investment costs. The average annual investment for all terminal
types drops significantly. Without the top 5 projects, the level of
investment for ports appears to be very low (\$40,600/mile), less than
40 percent of the average for all the NHS (\$102,100/mile), especially
since ports exhibit the most deficiencies overall. Investments in
truck/rail terminal connectors decline less dramatically, probably
because of a significant amount of work associated with the recent rail
mergers in modernizing and relocating terminals. While airport
connectors appear to be in relatively good condition, investments in
airport connectors also lag given the importance of air travel to a
community, the expected growth in air travel, and the

co-location of many air freight and passenger facilities. Pipelines are
reporting the lowest levels of investments but it is difficult to make
any conclusions since little is known about them.

There are currently no national, regional, or terminal based design
standards for intermodal access upon which to base a definitive
conclusive statement on adequacy of investment. Further examination in
cooperation with major freight stakeholders of desirable practices in
intermodal access design is warranted to determine the appropriate level
of condition or performance for NHS intermodal freight connectors.
Without an agreed upon standard or warrant for NHS connectors,
evaluations and judgments can only be made on connector investment
relative to other NHS routes and on the basis of professional
engineering judgment on the adequacy of connector service.

### 

### Challenges to Implementation of Intermodal Freight Connector Projects

The existing decision making process for transportation improvements in
States and MPOs has primarily focused on passenger needs, with the
assumption that any highway improvement also benefits freight
transportation. Freight transportation constituencies are different than
those for passenger and developing new public/private partnerships can
be challenging. The scarcity of funds, project eligibility and differing
responsibilities and perspectives between States, MPOs and local
governments creates a complex administrative situation in the
coordination and promotion of investments for intermodal freight
development and connector improvements. Compounding this problem is the
lack of quantitative tools that allow State and local governments to
properly evaluate the economic benefits of freight investment to the
region and Nation as a whole. Several States and MPOs have been
successful at raising freight transportation issues in the planning
process but others continue to struggle. Table 8 summarizes the
jurisdictional responsibility for NHS freight connectors.

**Table 8**

**Reported NHS Connector Mileage by Jurisdiction**

[Jurisdiction Mileage Percent]{.underline}

> State 349 29%
>
> Local 635 52%
>
> [State and Local (mix) 238 19%]{.underline}
>
> Total 1222 100%

As shown above, responsibility for freight connectors is not
consistently assumed at one jurisdictional level or another. More than
half of NHS connector mileage is under local jurisdictional control and
another 19% is split between State and local. Local jurisdictions are
often faced with myriad public requirements and they typically do not
see freight connectors as their responsibility. Where a local road is
under the control of the local jurisdiction, the State may not have the
authority to spend State funds off the State system to match NHS funds
or may not even see local roads as a priority. The generally low profile
of private freight operations in the community creates challenges for
focusing local public sector interest in freight movement. The fact that
local ownership is so high may account for the low investment levels on
freight connectors.

As noted at the outreach meetings, jurisdictional responsibility is only
an issue if the level of government with responsibility for connectors
does not have a full understanding of the needs of the freight
community. Participants at the Newark outreach session felt that
connectors would be better served under State control. In Tacoma,
participants felt that local governments were closer to the problem and
understand the needs of the port community, while the State has to
contend with numerous other concerns and might not be able to provide
the degree of focus and support needed.

The inventory form also asked what factors contributed to needed
improvements not being done. Responses from the survey form as to why
this is occurring (in order of frequency of response) are: 1) low
priority in State/MPO plans; 2) lack of local match or sponsorship; 3)
lack of private sector participation; 4) neighborhood-community
opposition; 5) environmental concerns; and 6) physical or other
constraints.

After the initial analysis of the field inventory data was done, a
series of outreach meetings were held to further refine and validate the
results and conclusions of this study. Those attending these outreach
meetings and in other forums where the results of the study were
presented, voiced agreement with the results and provided additional
input about their perceptions of the results of the study.

As with freight initiatives in general, the challenge for the NHS
freight connectors focuses on priorities for transportation funding. The
lack of a constituency to champion connector initiatives, combined with
the lack of public understanding on the role these connectors play in
the economic health of local communities and regions, as well as complex
community and environmental situations surrounding these facilities,
make successful intermodal development a challenging task.

**IV. Critical Issues and Strategic Initiatives** **for**

**Intermodal Connectors**

**Critical Issues**

This chapter identifies key issue areas and options to improve the
efficiency and operation of intermodal connectors, based on the analyses
conducted as part of this study. They also build on recommendations in
recent USDOT reports, specifically the Marine Transportation System
(MTS) report submitted to Congress in 1999, and the DOT report "Impact
of Changes in Ship Design on Ports and Intermodal Facilities". This
latter report was a product of a series of meetings held in 1998 with
freight stakeholders on trends in maritime shipping and the likely
impacts on ports and rail/highway intermodal linkages.

These issue areas and options are responsive to the comments expressed
in the outreach sessions conducted by FHWA for this report, and outreach
meetings with private sector freight interests, port and airport
authorities, States, and MPOs. Finally, they build on to the FHWA field
review of freight transportation conducted by the Corporate Management
Business Unit. This review resulted in a February, 2000 report
"Implementing Improvements to Enhance Freight Transportation".

The NHS intermodal freight connectors are unique in some ways; in
others, they are microcosms of general freight mobility. Transport
projects tend to be evaluated on the basis of their costs and benefits
to the sponsoring jurisdiction, whether at the State or the local level.
The environmental and social costs of both passenger and freight
projects, including the connectors, tend to be borne locally. Project
benefits, on the other hand, tend to be distributed differently.
Benefits of passenger projects tend to remain within the sponsoring
jurisdiction's boundaries, while the economic benefits of freight
projects are widely distributed. Increasing the awareness of freight
benefits and costs is an important role and contribution for the Federal
Government, and should be undertaken more extensively through the
development of economic analysis and network analysis tools to assist
States and local governments.

Making the leap from improved understanding and planning to actual
project development, however, will require financial support, since
jurisdictions naturally tend to program projects that show the greatest
direct benefits to their constituents. Systemic improvements for freight
mobility, including the NHS connectors, will likely require innovative
approaches and financing strategies to encourage consistent programming
of freight projects of widespread value to freight mobility. This is
particularly true as transportation "needs" continue outpacing State and
local abilities to deliver transport system improvements and services.
The following identifies the broad issue areas identified in the
analyses and outreach sessions.

> **[Benefits:]{.underline}** The problem of introducing freight
> projects may be compounded by the lack of adequate economic tools for
> rigorous and systemic evaluation, both of the freight connector
> projects and of the tradeoffs that must be assessed between freight
> connector and passenger-oriented projects. The goal of better
> understanding the benefits of NHS connector and other freight
> improvements to local communities, the region and the nation requires
> revisions to traditional planning procedures and the development of
> new tools to help States and MPOs better quantify these benefits.
>
> **[Ownership:]{.underline}** The analyses and outreach sessions
> clearly identified the "orphan" status of the intermodal connectors B
> roadways that generally lacked attention, with the exception of a
> handful of significant high-profile projects such as the Alameda
> Corridor in California, the FAST Corridor in Washington and the
> Portway in New Jersey. As one public sector agency executive noted at
> the Tacoma, Washington outreach meeting, *"the NHS intermodal
> connectors are someone else=s problem.@* The assessment of existing
> conditions on the intermodal connectors clearly demonstrated the lack
> of attention paid to these short-but-essential pieces of roadway.
>
> **[Time Horizon:]{.underline}** The question of ownership and
> responsibility is compounded by the time differences in public and
> private sector planning horizons. Project planning and development,
> even for relatively small projects, may take 5 to 10 years, depending
> on the complexity of the project. As a result, the private sector
> often loses interest in projects that seemingly take "forever" to be
> built. As one private sector representative commented, *"We know that
> we have to get engaged with the MPOs to get our projects. When I come
> to the meetings and ask when we can get some help, they tell me to
> come back in 7 years. That's not good enough. We can't wait that long.
> That's why we have a hard time getting engaged with government
> agencies...we have a different time horizon and they have a hard time
> dealing with that."*
>
> For extensive projects involving multiple jurisdictions, environmental
> evaluations, complex financing, and State/Federal project development
> oversight, the time horizon may be even lengthier. In addition, States
> and MPOs use multiyear programming of projects as a means of relating
> planning processes to project development. Typically, programs will be
> established 3 to 5 years out, with periodic updates to reprioritize
> projects as needed. Private sector decision making, in contrast, is
> accelerating to accommodate the demands of competitive international
> environments for quick response to market pressures. This means that
> public sector time frames for freight connector improvements are
> increasingly lagging private sector requirements for decision making.
>
> **[Institutional Impediments:]{.underline}** Introducing new projects,
> especially freight projects, into the pipeline is a political
> challenge when legitimate transportation needs invariably exceed
> anticipated revenues. Several States and MPOs are actively involved in
> freight planning, including the establishment of freight advisory
> committees, but it is difficult to maintain a high level of visibility
> over time. Examination of a better means of institutionalizing freight
> concerns and addressing the conflicts between public and private
> sector decision making will be required to address NHS connector and
> other intermodal freight transportation concerns in a more consistent
> manner. The designation of the connectors as NHS has increased the
> awareness of intermodal connectors; however, it is important to ensure
> that the appropriate public sector agencies and private sector freight
> stakeholders are involved in planning capital improvements and
> ensuring efficient operations. Improving awareness of freight and
> coordination are fundamental to the furtherance of this goal.
>
> Freight projects usually given priority are the high-profile major
> port, rail terminal, or airport terminal initiatives with the vast
> majority of connectors unnoticed in the planning process. High profile
> projects have been funded through the MPOs, States, and High Priority
> Projects under ISTEA and TEA-21. Approximately 20 percent of all
> federally funded freight transportation improvements have received
> funding under the Demonstration or High Priority Project programs.[^9]
> These high profile projects (for example: Alameda Corridor in
> California, Point Mack Terminal in Maine, FAST Corridor in Washington
> State, New Jersey Portway, Cross Harbor Freight Study in New York
> City, etc.) have brought to the attention of public officials, the
> potential for economic growth in the area, State, and nation as well
> as community, air quality, and congestion benefits. In contrast, most
> NHS intermodal freight connector improvements have not necessarily
> been understood, well defined, or have caught the imagination of the
> decision makers, and as a result, have not been funded. This was
> evidenced in the field review, which showed a very large share of the
> reported investments were on only a handful of connector projects.
>
> Optimal management of the intermodal connectors can only be achieved
> when public, private and multi-jurisdictional elements are
> coordinated. The need for coordination extends across project planning
> and development, into on-going operations and maintenance. The
> development and operation of intermodal connectors must be integrated
> into the planning of the freight facilities they serve (ports,
> airports, rail and pipeline terminals). A coordinated approach will
> also promote consideration of alternative strategies for addressing
> connectivity (such as infrastructure improvements, use of information
> technologies and institutional arrangements).

####### Charting a Course for Overcoming Impediments

FHWA should assess its role in facilitating the movement of freight with
the cooperation and support of those that represent intermodal
perspectives on freight mobility requirements from both private and
public transportation sectors. Also, given the variability in the data
reported for the connectors in the inventory, a more comprehensive
examination of deficiencies and investment options is desirable. This
assessment should be made in consultation with industry organizations
such as the American Association of State Highway and Transportation
Officials, the Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, the
Intermodal Association of North America, the American Association of
Port Authorities, and other carrier and shipper interest groups to
explore options to more effectively address issues of regional and
national concern. This approach will be useful to all stakeholders in
incorporating the needs of the freight community in the transport
project development process. This comprehensive approach is consistent
with other Departmental reviews of intermodal issues, most recently the
Marine Transportation System (MTS) report submitted to Congress in 1999,
which cited the need for examination of NHS connectors, and the DOT
report "Impact of Changes in Ship Design on Ports and Intermodal
Facilities."

This assessment should include an examination of planning procedures and
economic analysis tools and other research and development needs.
Program initiatives available under existing surface transportation
authorization, or possible future initiatives, to promote freight
mobility and NHS connector improvements, should also be considered.

The following section identifies several analysis options under each
issue area. They are not a definitive list of analysis options. They do
respond to general concerns raised in the field survey and in outreach
meetings as the appropriate areas of consideration to enhance NHS
connector focus within the statewide and metropolitan planning and
programming processes. They are included for illustrative purposes only
and as a point of departure for further discussion and examination.
*They are not policy recommendations*. Strategic options for further
analysis are presented for the following four issue areas:

> \_ Awareness and coordination;
>
> \_ Information technologies;
>
> \_ Funding; and
>
> \_ Community and environmental responsiveness.

####### 

####### Awareness and Coordination

Clearly the biggest problem in implementing intermodal connectors
projects is the lack of priority accorded to freight movements in the
planning and programming process. This is primarily due to the fact that
freight projects must compete with "high priority" passenger projects,
and with limited funding available. The result is very little is
invested in freight transportation improvements. Possible actions to
consider in raising the visibility and priority of freight projects in
State and MPO planning and programming processes are:

**Intermodal Connector Planning and Coordination Incentives**: As an
incentive to freight project development, additional funding for
planning and coordination could be used to financially support States
and MPOs who are identifying, conceptualizing and planning for freight
projects. Building on the comments received during the outreach
meetings, such grants would be awarded to areas and agencies that have
demonstrated a commitment to coordination and meaningful private sector
involvement. These incentives might consider a planning agency's
progress in facilitating on-going private sector freight participation,
coordinating project development among public agencies, and development
of a freight project implementation plan. Evaluation criteria would need
to be developed to encourage adoption of best practices in freight
planning throughout the State and local planning communities.

> **Identification of an Intermodal Network**: Many public planning
> agencies are not fully aware of the importance of freight to the
> economy of their region and to the Nation as a whole. Participants in
> outreach meetings highlighted the need to think of the intermodal
> connectors within the context of the full freight system. One possible
> means of raising the visibility of freight might be the identification
> of an intermodal freight network.
>
> In the early 1980s the National Truck Network (NTN) was designated.
> This network was primarily Interstate and principal arterial and other
> defined major truck routes. This network is limited in some States and
> does not extend to some of the largest generators of heavy truck
> traffic. A National Truck and Intermodal Network would be an extension
> of NTN to major ports, airports, rail yards, and pipeline terminals
> that generate high volumes of intermodal freight by truck. It is
> envisioned that the highway component, including intermodal
> connectors, of this freight network would be a subset of the NHS.
> Designation of the intermodal connectors to a national freight network
> would assure the consideration of trucks in the design of any
> improvements on the network.
>
> Several multi-state pooled-fund initiatives to evaluate the regional
> importance of freight corridors and other key transport facilities are
> underway or have been completed by States. However, States
> participating in pooled fund initiatives may not always agree on the
> regional prioritization of improvements because of their own State
> needs. There is strong evidence that regional approaches do increase
> the degree of understanding of the relative significance of freight
> corridors within a regional context. Routes and facilities of critical
> significance to freight can be identified, but the methods used in
> identification can either reinforce or undermine the legitimacy of the
> effort. A true partnership demands consultation between the various
> units of government in determining regional and national priorities.
> This is the first step to a more fully coordinated program of regional
> improvements and the fact that these initiatives result in
> self-selected routes of significance rather than top down designation
> of critical routes is critical to support at the State and local
> levels.

**Consideration of intermodal connectors in any federally funded port,
aviation or roadway study or project:** The efficient operation of the
intermodal facility is contingent upon the efficient operation of the
intermodal connectors. Accordingly, federally funded studies or capital
projects on federally funded intermodal terminals should include an
evaluation of the adequacy of the highway connectors to identify needed
infrastructure and operations improvements. Such an assessment would
encourage a closer linkage between transportation planning, land use
planning, zoning, and site development.

####### Information Technologies

An area not addressed in the inventory, because of its invisibility, is
the use of information technologies. Industry trends clearly indicate
the need for information utilization as well as seamless physical
movements. Integrated information technologies use offers the
opportunity to optimize the physical capacity of the intermodal
connectors, facilitating efficient freight flows. Currently, an array of
information systems can be used to facilitate freight movement. In many
cases, systems developed to expedite the movement of freight do not
extend to the intermodal connectors or the terminals they serve and/or
are not interoperable across the various segments of the intermodal
system.

Information technologies can be used to make more efficient use of the
capacity of connectors by informing drivers of gate queues, railroad
crossing closings, road conditions and delays, best route information
and the availability of loads. In addition, compatibility between
information systems must be addressed. The Federal government should
continue to encourage strategies that integrate the use of information
technologies into the operation of the intermodal connectors and other
major freight routes as well. In this manner, the Federal government can
ensure that both the information and physical requirements for
intermodal connectivity are addressed.

####### Funding

Inadequate funding was identified in the outreach meetings as the most
critical problem constraining improvements on the NHS connectors. The
needs and capital requirements of the intermodal connectors vary
exten­sively throughout the country. Some projects are minor, involving
spot improvements, signing, and traffic control devices; others are
significantly greater in size and required investment. Another problem
area identified in the inventory and analysis was the inability of some
States to spend funds off the State system as well as lack of local
match, often required by the State.

The Transportation Equity Act for the 21^st^ Century (TEA-21) included
the Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA), a
program that provides Federal credit assistance (e.g., direct loans,
loan guarantees, and lines of credit) to large-scale transportation
projects of national significance. However, each project must meet
certain criteria to qualify: it must cost at least \$100 million or 50%
of a State's annual apportionment of Federal-aid funds, whichever is
less, and must be supported in whole or in part from user charges or
other non-Federal dedicated funding sources. These criteria would
eliminate most of the types of projects proposed on intermodal
connectors.

It is suggested that a full range of financing mechanisms be
investigated over the next two years prior to reauthorization. These
include: 1) a new Federal credit program, similar to TIFIA, targeted at
smaller intermodal connector projects; 2) expand the eligibility of the
Railroad Rehabilitation and Improvement Financing credit program to
include intermodal connector projects; 3) expand or strengthen the State
Infrastructure Banks program, to allow for the capitalization of an
intermodal freight connectors account with Federal‑aid; 4) encourage the
creation of State level credit programs or infrastructure funds for
intermodal freight connector projects; 5) connector incentive grants to
overcome some of the problems encountered by the States and local areas
in funding freight improvements; 6) reducing the match required for
Federal funds where connectors under local ownership do not have the
resources; and 7) a set‑aside of NHS funds for intermodal connector
projects. State and local agency input for any proposed initiative will
be sought through ongoing forums, conferences, etc. A National Freight
Roundtable representing private freight interests could also provide
valuable dialogue on any possible initiatives. However, it is also
recognized that these are mechanisms that are subject to congressional
action but can be looked at during the reauthorization of the highway
program at the end of TEA‑21.

***Community and Environmental Responsiveness***

An evaluation of environmental considerations related to freight
projects found that such projects encounter nearly every type of issue.
As freight traffic continues to consolidate (rail mergers, big ships,
etc.) into fewer major hubs, the amount of traffic on, and the
importance of efficient intermodal connectors will grow. The development
and operation of connectors cannot be done in a vacuum. Existing and
potential environmental concerns must be recognized and addressed early
in the planning process. The development and operation of intermodal
connectors are subject to environ­mental considerations such as wetlands,
endangered species and habitats, historical structures, air quality,
noise, cohesion and environmental justice.

Because of their role in serving heavy truck movements through the
freight system, intermodal connectors generate more "host community"
issues than many other transportation projects. Host community issues
arise where communities adjacent or proximate to where the intermodal
freight terminals and connectors are physically located have the
perception that the benefits generated by such facilities and any
associated improvement projects go to areas beyond their own. The host
community believes they are exposed to the negative impacts generated by
the truck traffic while other areas receive the benefits of improved
freight service. In many cases, these perceptions are valid ones since
they have to deal with a disproportion­ate share of the negative impacts
(e.g., air quality, community disruption, noise, traffic, and safety
issues). This can easily become the focus of host community concerns,
especially on local roads. In order to deliver necessary transportation
improvements while protecting communities, early consideration of these
issues is critical.

Environmental protection and community considerations must be integrated
into the development and operation of intermodal connectors. Suggested
considerations to be examined in planning and project development for
intermodal connectors include:

1\) exploring mechanisms for leveraging the transportation investment
into local economic development opportunities; 2) taking into account
the concerns of surrounding communities regarding such issues as truck
traffic, air quality and noise; 3) identifying creative strategies to
meet local, State and Federal environmental requirements;

4\) ensuring appropriate planning and training to enable quick response
to environmental incidents; and 5) identifying funding for host
communities to explore avenues to reduce the localized impacts faced by
the communities surrounding major regional freight terminals and advance
the state-of-the-art for successfully integrat­ing freight movement into
the nation=s landscape and communities. These actions will promote
intermodal projects as a "good neighbor" to communities and other land
uses.

**APPENDICES**

**Appendix A**

## NHS Intermodal Connector Selection Criteria

Proposed modifications consisting of connections to major intermodal
facilities should be developed using the criteria set forth below. These
criteria were used for identifying initial NHS intermodal connections to
major intermodal terminals. The primary criteria are based on annual
passenger volumes, annual freight volumes, or daily vehicular traffic on
one or more principal routes that serve the intermodal facility. The
secondary criteria include factors which underscore the importance of an
intermodal facility within a specific State.

**PRIMARY CRITERIA**

**Commercial Aviation Airports**

**1**. Passengers‑‑ scheduled commercial service with more than 250,000
annual enplanements.

**2.** Cargo‑‑100 trucks per day in each direction on the principal
connecting route, or 100,000 tons per year arriving or departing by
highway mode.

**Ports**

**1.** Terminals that handle more than 50,000 TEUs (a volumetric measure
of containerized cargo which stands for twenty‑foot equivalent units)
per year, or other units measured that would convert to more than 100
trucks per day in each direction. (Trucks are defined as large
single‑unit trucks or combination vehicles handling freight.)

**2**. Bulk commodity terminals that handle more than 500,000 tons per
year by highway or 100 trucks per day in each direction on the principal
connecting route. (If no individual terminal handles this amount of
freight, but a cluster of terminals in close proximity to each other
does, then the cluster of terminals could be considered in meeting the
criteria. In such cases, the connecting route might terminate at a point
where the traffic to several terminals begins to separate.)

**3**. Passenger terminals that handle more than 250,000 passengers per
year or 1,000 passengers per day for at least 90 days during the year.

**Truck/Rail**

50,000 TEUs/year, or 100 trucks per day, in each direction on the
principal connecting route, or other units measured that would convert
to more than 100 trucks per day in each direction. (Trucks are defined
as large single‑unit trucks or combination vehicles carrying freight.)

**Pipelines**

100 trucks/day in each direction on the principal connecting route.

**Amtrak**

100,000 passengers/year (entrainments and detrainments). Joint Amtrak,
intercity bus and public transit terminals should be considered based on
the combined passenger volumes. Likewise, two or more separate
facilities in close proximity should be consid­ered based on combined
passenger volumes.

**Intercity Bus**

100,000 passengers/year (boardings and deboardings).

**Public Transit**

**1.** Stations with park and ride lots of more than 500 vehicle parking
spaces: or

**2.** 5,000 daily bus or rail passengers with significant highway
access (i.e., a high percentage of the passengers arrive by cars and
buses using a route that connects to an NHS route); or

**3**. A major hub terminal that provides for the transfer of passengers
between several bus routes. These stations should have a significant
number of buses using a connector route to the NHS.

**Ferries**

Interstate/international ‑‑ 1000 passengers/day for at least 90 days
(usually summer) during the year. A ferry connecting two terminals
within the same metropolitan area is considered local transit, not
interstate.

**SECONDARY CRITERIA**

Any of the following criteria could be used to justify NHS connections
to intermodal terminals where there is a significant highway interface:

**1**. Intermodal terminals that handle more than 20 percent of
passenger or freight volumes by mode within a State;

**2**. Intermodal terminals identified either in the Intermodal
Management System or the State and metropolitan transportation plans as
a major facility;

3\. Significant investment in, or expansion of, an intermodal terminal;
or

4\. Connecting routes targeted by the State, MPO, or others for
investment to address an existing, or anticipated, deficiency as a
result of increased traffic.

**Proximate Connections**

Intermodal terminals, identified under the secondary criteria noted
above, may not have sufficient highway traffic volumes to justify an NHS
connection on any single route to the terminal. States and MPOs should
fully consider whether a direct connection should be identified for such
terminals, or whether being in the proximity (2 to 3 miles) of a NHS
route is sufficient.

**Appendix B**

### NHS Connector Condition and Investment Inventory Form 

### 

### [General Guidance]{.underline}

The purpose of the NHS Connector Condition and Investment Study is to
characterize\--in a meaningful way\--the nature and extent of physical
and operational problems on freight connectors and investments made on
them. Results for specific connectors or States will not be
disseminated. While the study is focused on the recently approved NHS
connectors, those connector-like facilities previously approved in the
initial NHS system designation should be included as regular connectors.
Since these routes are not listed as connectors in our files, the
Division and State DOT will have to identify them and include them in
the inventory. A State may also want to include intermodal facilities
(i.e. terminals previously identified with 0.0 mileage) that \"front\"
(i.e., have no connector) on mainline NHS routes. In these instances, a
reasonable length of route (up to 2 miles or to a higher functionally
classified facility) should be inventoried (Items C5. through D3. of the
inventory from).

We believe that much of the information can be obtained from existing
data sources maintained within the State DOTs, MPOs and possibly local
jurisdictions. However, there may be on-site visits needed to supplement
available sources. If on-site visits are needed, a team approach
involving the Division, State DOT, MPOs, local jurisdictions and
terminal operators is recommended. Much of this information can be
obtained by a \"windshield\" survey.

In many cases, States with Intermodal Management Systems (IMS) can
provide most of the information requested on the inventory form.
Therefore, the IMS should be a rich source of information. The terminal
operators should also be an excellent source of information. They may be
able to provide information on nonrecurring and traffic operational
problems such as congestion and delays and when they occur; safety
problems and high accident locations; railroad crossing delays;
clearance and weight restrictions; and other observations on problems or
impediments affecting the operation and service to the terminal
facility.

While the States are now beginning to report Highway Performance
Monitoring System (HPMS) Universe Data for recently designated NHS
connectors, they have not achieved full reporting at this time. Even
with full reporting, HPMS would not provide answers for the range of
questions about the conditions on connectors, related improvements and
impediments that are the primary focus of the study.

The information on investments is critical to the study but we recognize
the potential difficulties associated with getting complete data,
especially where local and private sector funding is involved. TIPs and
STIPs should be an excellent source of information. To obtain
information on funding from local agencies or private sources,
discussions with terminal operators may be necessary. In these
discussions of investments, information can be obtained on any perceived
impediments to investments on connectors.

**[Data Checklist Item Requirement Instructions]{.underline}**

**Header Identification** - The facility information at the beginning of
the form will be supplied by headquarters from the NHS freight connector
database file. The facility ID number to be entered in the header is
derived from this data. It consists of a two character State code, a
terminal ID number, and a one character terminal type code (A-airport,
L-truck/pipeline,

P-port, and R-truck/rail). If a terminal has more than one connector,
there will be a single numeric code which will uniquely identify each
connector (e.g., 1, 2, 3\...).

**Part I - HPMS Universe Data**

**HPMS Universe Data** - The items requested from the HPMS data records
are: rural/urban(9), functional system (12), governmental ownership
(20), AADT (28), through lanes (30), urban location or character of land
use (31), and pavement condition rating (PSR, PCR, or IRI) (36). The
descriptors for theses items and coding instructions are contained in
the HPMS Field Manual. Because of the importance of pavement condition,
it should be verified in all site visits and reported in Part II of the
form.

The State should have already submitted the 1997 HPMS data. There may be
some difficulty in matching the HPMS data to the associated connector,
however, there is a 100 character identification field for each section
record which may provide street names to assist in matching the
connector and the HPMS sections. State, county, and urbanized area code
will also be useful in identifying the HPMS section location. Section
length and type of terminal facility (2 Airport, 3 Port, 5 Rail/Truck, 8
Pipeline) are also in the HPMS universe record. It is likely that
multiple HPMS sections will make up the full length of a connector.

**Bridge/Structure Numbers** - Matching Bridge Inventory Structure data
with connectors cannot be accomplished without the bridge/structure
number. Please enter the bridge/structure number for each structure and
if it is on or over the connector. The numbers may be available on the
structure or it may be necessary to obtain the information from the
State.

**Railroad Crossing Numbers** - Matching railroad crossing records with
NHS connectors also requires the crossing number. Please enter the
6-digit, 1-letter \"U.S DOT/AAR National Rail-Highway Crossing Inventory
Number\" for each active at-grade crossing on the connector. All
crossings should have the number posted at the crossing.

**Part II - Connector Condition Information**

**A. Geometric and Physical Features**

> **A1**. **Pavement Condition** - The HPMS data may have PSR data,
> however, it should be verified on any site visit. If IRI is reported
> in HPMS, a conversion to PSR is requested. The important consideration
> here is speed reduction caused by poor pavement condition. This can
> best be observed by a field visit and riding over the facility. If
> pavement condition is not uniform and changes significantly over the
> length of the connector, please report the estimated percentages in
> each category.
>
> **A2**. Check items that are a problem.
>
> a\. **Inadequate Travelway Width** (width available for trucks) - On
> some of the lower functional systems, the connectors won=t be striped
> so it may operate as a single lane of more than 12 feet. If roadway
> width is not adequate for two-way truck traffic, it would be
> considered inadequate.
>
> b\. **Inadequate Shoulder Width** - There should be sufficient width
> to accommodate a parked truck without hindering traffic flow.
>
> c\. **Lack of Stabilized Shoulders** - If the shoulder is not paved,
> it should be able to support heavy trucks.
>
> d\. **Tight Turning Radii at Intersections** - Where right turning
> trucks are required to make wide turns into adjacent lanes.
> Immountable curbs and other obstructions at the corner make the
> problem more severe.
>
> e\. **Road Not Paved** - Self explanatory.
>
> f\. **Bridge/Overpass Vertical Clearances** - For connectors where
> bridges or tunnels are posted (usually less than 14 feet for other
> than Interstate).
>
> g\. **Weight Limitations Road/Bridge** - Posted less than normal legal
> loads (i.e. less than what is permitted for this type of road).
>
> h\. **Narrow Bridge/Tunnel** - Is width inadequate to safely
> accommodate two-way truck traffic.
>
> i\. **Rough Abandoned Railroad Crossing** - Report for rough crossing
> surfaces, especially where there is significant reductions in speed.
>
> j\. **Drainage/Flooding** - Where standing water periodically impedes
> traffic.

**B. At-Grade Railroad Crossings**

> **B1**. Report the **number of active crossing locations**. A single
> location may have more than one set of tracks at a single location or
> crossing treatment. The survey form has three columns for up to 3
> separate crossings. If additional columns are needed they can be added
> manually.
>
> **B3**. **Railroad Crossing Problems**
>
> a\. **Delays at Railroad Crossing** - If delays are considered a
> problem, delaying traffic for excessive periods.
>
> b\. **Switching/Make-up Operations** - Where on-terminal train
> facilities are too short to handle train make-up, requiring trains to
> back out on the connector and block traffic.
>
> c\. **Crossing Warning Devices** - Where crossing warning devices are
> substandard or active warning devices are warranted.
>
> d\. **Inadequate Sight Distance at Crossing** - Where lateral
> obstructions block a drivers view of oncoming trains, especially those
> crossings without active warning devices.
>
> e\. **Rough Railroad Crossing Surface** -Where the roughness or
> profile causes a significant reduction in speed to crossing vehicles.
>
> f\. **Vehicle Under-clearance** (Humped Crossing) - Where there is a
> possibility of a low-bed truck getting hung-up at the crossing.
>
> g\. **Lack of Alternative Route** - For connectors with extended
> delays that essentially block access to the facility.

**C. Traffic Operations and Safety**

> **C2**. Check reasons for delay and when they occur **[on the
> connector]{.underline}**. AM/PM peak is the commuter peak (morning and
> afternoon rush hours when workers are going to and from work). Peak
> hour of the terminal is when the terminal is busiest. It may occur in
> the AM peak when trucks arrive or it may be mid-morning where trucks
> avoid the AM peak. It may also occur at other times when a train or
> ship is unloading/loading. Both may apply.
>
> a/b. **Heavy Traffic/Congested** - Where traffic volumes exceed the
> capacity of the connector, at some location along the route, probably
> during peak periods.
>
> c/d. **Long Delays at Traffic Signals** - Where the intersection fails
> to clear on cycle.
>
> e/f. **Difficulty Making Left or Right Turns** - Back-ups due to heavy
> turning volumes.
>
> g/h. **Lack of Turning Lanes at Intersection** - Additional turn lanes
> are necessary to handle traffic at one or more intersections.
>
> i/j. **Lack of Traffic Signals** - Because of truck operating
> characteristics, signals may be warranted at high volume
> intersections.
>
> k/l. **Truck Queues at Gates** - This could occur before terminal
> gates are open during peak periods. It may cause back-ups on the
> connector if the ques occupy travel lanes. It may also occur from
> other truck terminals along the connector (i.e. not the intermodal
> terminal).
>
> m/n. **Frequent Accidents** - A higher than average accident history
> would indicate a safety problem.
>
> o/p. **On-Street Parking Conflicts** - Where vehicles maneuvering in
> and out of on-street parking create either a safety problem or delay
> traffic. Illegal parking by trucks or other vehicles may also be a
> problem.
>
> q/r. **Moveable Span Bridges** - Bridge openings during terminals
> operations.
>
> **C6**. Delays at the **[connector/mainline NHS
> junction]{.underline}.**
>
> a/b. **Heavy Traffic on Mainline NHS** - Where it is difficult for
> trucks to merge on to the NHS .
>
> c/d. **Lack of Merge Area on to Mainline** - Could occur where trucks
> enter a higher-speed facility.
>
> e/f. **Lack of Traffic Signals** - Where an uncontrolled or stop
> controlled intersection is congested. For example, because of truck
> operating characteristics, the number of acceptable gaps for trucks
> crossing or entering a heavily traveled facility may be a problem.
>
> g/h. **Poorly Designed Ramps** - Do not adequately handle larger
> trucks or cause indirect routing.
>
> i/j. **Tight Turning Radii at Intersection** - This could cause
> back-ups at intersections where trucks have to wait for breaks in
> traffic to make wide turns.
>
> k/l. **Lack of Turning Lanes** - Additional turn lanes are necessary
> to handle traffic.

**D. Other Factors**

> **D1**. **Lack of truck route signs** - Drivers unfamiliar with the
> location of the terminal getting lost.
>
> D2. Any other problems that would not fit in any of the above
> categories.

**Part III - Investment Information**

**E/F. Past and Programmed Investments**

> **E1**. Information on **improvements made since the connector was
> designated** may be available from TIP/STIP program documents. For
> improvements on local roads, it may be necessary to contact the local
> jurisdiction or the terminal operator.
>
> **F1**. **Programmed improvements for the next 3-5 years** are
> identified on approved STIPS or TIPS. For some improvements, it may be
> difficult to identify the time period exactly so judgement should be
> used.
>
> **E/F2**. These are the standard improvement categories. Use the left
> column for improvements made since 1995. Use the right column for
> programmed improvements.
>
> **E/F3**. Report past spending on left and programmed funds on right.

**G. Other Improvement Information**

> **G1**. Report any **improvements beyond those reported as
> programmed** above that are planned and expected to be built in the
> next 3 to 5 years.
>
> **G2**. These are **non-highway improvements** such as building
> on-dock rail or non-connector highway improvements such as
> improvements to the mainline NHS that reduce the congestion getting to
> the connector.

**Appendix C**

**NHS Intermodal Freight Connector Listing**

**Facility Type**

**[Alabama]{.underline}**

**BIRMINGHAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Highway to I-59/20

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR DIXIE HUB CENTER** Truck/Rail

Finley Blvd. to I-65 and U.S. 78 West

**HUNTSVILLE INTERNATIONAL INTERMODAL CENTER** Port

Wall-Triana Highway from I-565 to the Port Facility

**ALABAMA STATE DOCKS (FREIGHT DOCKS)** Port

Beauregard St and The Robert Hope Bridge from the Facility to Water St
and I-165

**ALABAMA STATE DOCKS(CSX AND BN RAIL/TRUCK)** Truck/Rail

Beauregard St and The Robert Hope Bridge from the Facility to Water St
and I-165 (Same as 7P)

**BROOKLEY INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX** Truck/Rail

Michigan Ave (Ave I to I-10)

**PORT BIRMINGHAM - NORTH TERMINAL** Port

AL 269 (Port to I-20)

**PORT BIRMINGHAM - CENTRAL TERMINAL** Port

AL 269 (Port to I-20)\...Mileage included as part of North Terminal
(11P).

**PORT BIRMINGHAM - SOUTH TERMINAL** Port

AL 269 (Port to I-20) \... Mileage included with North Terminal Complex
(11P)

**COLONIAL PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

Facility to 28th St. to Balsam Ave. to Nabors Rd. to Ishkooda Rd. to
Spaulding-Ishkooda Rd. to

**ERNEST NORRIS RR YARDS** Truck/Rail

Entrance at Norfolk Southern Dr. to Ruffner Rd. to 16th St. to US 78 to
Kilgore Mem. Dr. to I-20

**[Alaska]{.underline}**

**PORT OF ANCHORAGE** Port

Ocean Dock Rd. to E. 5th/6th Ave. to Seward Hwy

**ANCHORAGE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

International Airport Road

**FAIRBANKS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Way

**KETCHIKAN PORT** Port

Tongass Ave

**PORT OF JUNEAU** Port

Thane Rd (Mount Roberts Dr to Egan Dr.)

**SITKA AIRPORT** Airport

Halibut Point Rd.

**PORT OF NENANA** Port

Nenana Port Access Rd to Front St. to Nenana St.

**PORT OF VALDEZ** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**Facility Type**

**PORT NIKISKI - KENAI** Port

Kenai Spur

**PORT OF SKAGWAY** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**[Arizona]{.underline}**

**PHOENIX SKY HARBOR INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Sky Harbor Blvd between I-10 and SR 153

**TUCSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Tucson Blvd ( Valencia Rd to Airport Circle), Airport Circle (Tucson
Blvd to Tucson Blvd)

Country Club Rd (Valencia to Los Reales), Los Reales Rd(Country Club to
Airport Cir)

**GLENDALE INTERMODAL AND AUTO YARD** Truck/Rail

51st Ave (Grand Ave to I-10)

**PHOENIX INTERMODAL AND AUTO YARD** Truck/Rail

7th St (I-10 to I-17)

**[Arkansas]{.underline}**

**FORT SMITH REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From I-540 to Phoenix Rd. to Airport Blvd to terminal

**UNION PACIFIC RAIL/TRUCK RAMP** Truck/Rail

From I-40(ex 157) to SH161 to Bethany Rd

**LITTLE ROCK NATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Bankhead Dr (I-440 to Airport Dr), Airport Dr (Bankhead to Temple),
Temple St (Airport Dr to

**LITTLE ROCK PORT COMPLEX** Port

Fourche Dam Pike (I-440 to Lindsey), 0.9 mi on Lindsey Rd

**UNION PACIFIC EBONY TERMINAL, W MEMPHIS** Truck/Rail

SH 118 (I-40 to Red Cross), Red Cross Rd( SH 118 to Kuhn), Kuhn Rd (Red
Cross to Terminal)

**ST. LOUIS SOUTHWESTERN RAILROAD COMPLEX** Truck/Rail

2nd St (US 65 to Port Rd), Port Rd (2nd to Emmett Sanders), Emmett
Sanders (Port to Port of Pine

Bluff Complex)

**CENTRAL AR PIPELINE/FUEL STORAGE COMPLEX** Truck/Pipeline

From I-440(ex 10) to US 70 to Central Airport Road

**LION OIL PIPELINE/REFINERY/FUEL STORAGE** Truck/Pipeline

Robert E Lee St \[formerly SH 335\](US 82 to Hinson), Hinson Rd (Robert
Lee to Terminal)

**PORT OF PINE BLUFF** Port

2nd St (US 65 to Port Rd), Port Rd (2nd to Emmett Sanders), Emmett
Sanders (Port to Port of Pine

Bluff Complex) - Same as 12R

**TRUMAN ARNOLD FUEL STORAGE COMPLEX** Truck/Pipeline

Club Rd (I-40 to SH 38), SH 38 (Club to S Loop), South Loop Rd (SH 38 to
8th), 8th St (S Loop to

Terminal)

**PORT OF VAN BUREN COMPLEX** Port

SH 59 (Port Access Rd to I-540)

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN & SANTE FE INTERMODAL** Truck/Rail

**TERMINAL**

Frontage Rd (US 64 to 77 Bypass), 77 Bypass (Frontage to SH 77), SH 77
(77 Bypass to terminal)

**[California]{.underline}**

**Facility Type**

**FRESNO AIR TERMINAL AIRPORT** Airport

Clinton Way (Airport to McKinley), McKinley Av. (Clinton to Rt 41)

**LOS ANGELES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Century Blvd(Sepulveda to 1-405),Aviation Blvd(Century to I-105), La
Cienega Blvd(Century to

I-105), Imperial Hwy(La Cienega to Sepulveda), Sepulveda Blvd(Century to
I-105), 104th

St(Aviation to La Cienega), 111th St(Aviation to La Cienega)

**OAKLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Dr (Hegenberger to Doolittle), Hegenberger Dr (Doolittle to
I-880), 98th Ave (Airport Dr

**ONTARIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Archibald Av (Airport to Rt 10)

Vineyard Av. (Airport to Rt. 10)

**LINDBURGH FIELD - SAN DIEGO** Airport

N. Harbor Dr.(Terminal to W. Laurel St), W. Laurel St (N. Harbor Dr to
I-5)

**SAN FRANCISCO INTL AIRPORT** Airport

San Bruno Ave (US 101 to Airport Entrance)

**SAN JOSE INTL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF LONG BEACH** Port

Ocean Blvd (Port to SR-710), 9th/10th St (Santa Fe to Pico), Pico Ave
(9th/10th to Ocean Blvd),

Santa Fe (Anaheim to 9th), Anaheim St (Sante Fe to Alameda)

**PORT OF LOS ANGELES** Port

Seaside Ave (Ferry St to SR 47)

Gibson Blvd (Port to B), B St (Gibson to Alameda), Alameda St (B to
Anaheim) - B St is now Harry

Bridges Blvd

Figueroa St (B to C ), C St (Figueroa to I-110)

**PORT OF SAN FRANCISCO** Port

Cargo Way (Jennings to 3rd), 3rd St (Cargo Way to Cesar Chavez), Cesar
Chavez St. (3rd St to Rt

101\) - (Cargo Way proposed)

**PORT OF OAKLAND** Port

Maritime St (7th to W Grand Ave), W Grand Ave (Maritime to I-880), 7th
St (Maritime to I-880)

**PORT OF RICHMOND** Port

Harbour Way (Terminal to I-580)

Canal Blvd (Terminal to I-580)

**PORT OF SACRAMENTO** Port

Enterprise Blvd (Industrial Rd to I-80), Industrial Blvd (Enterprise
Blvd to Harbor Blvd), Harbor

Blvd (Industrial Blvd to US 50)

**PORT OF REDWOOD CITY** Port

Seaport Blvd. (Port to Rt. 101)

Bloomquist St (Seaport Blvd to Maple), Maple St (Bloomquist to Facility)

**PORT HUENEME** Port

Hueneme Rd (Port to Los Pasos), Los Pasos (Hueneme to US 101)

Ventura Rd (Hueneme to Channel Island), Channel Island Blvd (Ventura to
Victoria), Victoria Ave

(Channel Island to US 101)

**Facility Type**

**PORT OF SAN DIEGO** Port

Pacific Hwy (Laurel to NSC Compound), Grape St (Pacific Hwy to I-5),
Hawthorne St (Pacific Hwy

to I-5), Broadway (Pacific Hwy to 11th), 11th St.(Broadway to I-5)

**PORT OF HUMBOLT** Port

Washington St. (Port to Rt. 101)

**CHANNEL ISLANDS HARBOR** Port

Victoria Ave (Terminal to Rte 101) mileage included in CA36P

**PORT OF BENICIA** Port

Bayshore Rd. (Port to Park), Park Rd. (Bayshore to Industrial),
Industrial Way (Park to I-680)

**PORT OF STOCKTON** Port

Harbor St (Terminal to Fresno), Fresno Ave (Harbor to Navy), Navy Dr (W
Washington to Charter

Way), Charter Way (Navy to I-5), W Washington St (Navy to Fresno)

**EUREKA PIPELINE TER.** Truck/Pipeline

Washington St. (Port to Rt. 101). (same as 38P)

**LOS ANGELES 2 PIPELINE TER.** Truck/Pipeline

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**LOS ANGELES 1 PIPELINE TER.** Truck/Pipeline

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**FRESNO TOPC RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

North Ave.(Facility to Rt.99)

**LONG BEACH (CARSON )RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Sepulveda Blvd. (Facility to Rt. 47)

**OAKLAND RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Middle Harbor Rd. (7th St to I-880)

**LATHROP RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Roth Rd. (Airport Rd to I-5), Airport Rd (Roth to French Camp), French
Camp Rd (Airport to SR 99)

**LA (NR. UNION STATION)** Truck/Rail

Lamar St.(Station to N. Main), N Main St.(Lamar to Daly), Daly St.(N
Main to N Mission), Mission

Rd.(Daly to I-5)

Ave 20 (N Main to N Broadway), N Broadway (Ave 20 to I-5)

**RICHMOND RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Canal Blvd. (Facility to I-580)

**LA ATSF RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Washington Blvd. (Hobart Yard to I-710)

Shelia St (Arrowmile to Atlantic), Atlantic Blvd (Shelia to Bandini),
Bandini Blvd (S Downey to

to I-710) - Connector 2 is proposed)

**STOCKTON RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Anderson St. (Facility to Diamond St.), Diamond St (Anderson to Charter
Way), Charter Way

(Diamond to SR 99), Mariposa Rd (Charter Way to SR 99)

**SAN BERNADINO RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

2nd St (I-215 to Mt Vernon), Mount Vernon(4th St to Rialto), 4th St (Mt
Vernon to 5th), Rialto Ave

(Mt Vernon to Sidewinder Mountain Rd)

**CITY OF INDUSTRY RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Azusa Ave (Anaheim-Puente Rd to SR 60), Anahein-Puenta Rd to Arenth Ave)

Fullerton Rd (Arenth Ave to SR 60)

**Facility Type**

**LA/VERNON FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Washington St. (Facility to I-710) - Included in LA ATSF Railyard(CA66R)

**UPS - RICHMOND TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Atlas Rd (Facility to Richmond Pk), Richmond Pkwy (Atlas to I-80)

**[Colorado]{.underline}**

**UNION PACIFIC RR AUTO TRANSFER** Truck/Rail

From I-76: E 0.1 mi on 96th Ave, N 0.5 mi on I-76 Frontage Road to
Terminal Entrance

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR AUTO TRANSFER** Truck/Rail

From I-76: E 1.6 mi on 88th Ave, N 0.5 mi on Yosemite Ave to terminal
entrance

**KANEB PIPELINE TRANSFER** Truck/Pipeline

From I-76: E 0.1 mi on 88th Ave, S 1.3 mi on Brighton Rd, E 0.3 mi on
80th St to entr at Krameria St

**SOUTHERN PACIFIC RR TRANSFER FACILITY** Truck/Rail

From I-76: South on Pecos Street to Terminal Entrance at 56th Avenue

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN RR TRANSFER FACILITY** Truck/Rail

53rd Pl. to Bannock St. to Broadway to 58th Ave. to S.H. 53 to I-25.

**CONOCO PIPELINE TRANSFER** Truck/Pipeline

From U.S. 6: W 0.8 mi on 56th Avenue to Terminal Entrance at Brighton
Blvd

**UNION PACIFIC RR TRANSFER FACILITY** Truck/Rail

From S.H. 2 (Colorado Blvd): W 1.4 mi on S.H. 33 (40th Ave) to terminal
entrance at Williams

**TOTAL PETROLEUM PIPELINE TERMINAL** Truck/Pipeline

From U.S. 6: W 0.8 mi on 56th Avenue to Terminal Entrance at Brighton
Blvd. (Same as Conoco

Pipeline - 11L)

**PHILLIPS PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

From U.S. 6: W 0.8 mi on 56th Avenue to Terminal Entrance at Brighton
Blvd. (Same as Conoco

Pipeline - 11L)

**DENVER INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Pena Blvd (E 470 interchange E 0.7 mile)

**[Connecticut]{.underline}**

**BRADLEY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

SR 401 (SR 20 to Airport Entrance), SR 20 (I-91 to SR 401)

**NEW LONDON STATE PIER** Port

SR 437 (Rt. 32 to State Pier)

**[Delaware]{.underline}**

**PORT OF WILMINGTON** Port

Terminal Ave (Port to I-495)

**[Florida]{.underline}**

**PENSACOLA SEAPORT** Port

Bayfront Pkwy (Entrance to 9th Ave), 9th Ave. (Bayfront to I-110/US 98)

**PORT EVERGLADES - FORT LAUDERDALE** Port

Eller Dr. (SE 7th Ave. to SE 19th Ave.)

**PORT OF PALM BEACH** Port

US 1 (Entrance to Blue Heron), Blue Heron Blvd. (US 1 to I-95)

**Facility Type**

**PORT MANATEE** Port

Piney Point Rd. (Dock St. to US 41), US 41 (Piney Point to I-275)

**CSX INTERMODAL - ORLANDO** Truck/Rail

Orange Ave. (Facility to Sand Lake Rd.), Sand Lake Rd. (Orange Ave to
SR-528)

**ORLANDO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Boggy Creek Rd. (Entrance to SR 417)

**PORT CANAVERAL** Port

George King Bl (Port to A1A), Dave Nisbet Dr (George King to SR 528), SR
528 (Dave N. to SR

**MIAMI INTL AIRPORT** Airport

LeJueune Rd. (Entrance to SR 836), 21st St. (LeJeune to 37th St.), 37th
St. (21st to SR 836)

NW 25th St. (Ludlam Rd. to SR 826)

**PORT OF MIAMI** Port

Port Blvd. (Entrance to Biscayne), Biscayne Blvd. (Port Bl to I-395)

**PARSEC - MIAMI** Truck/Rail

NW 36 St.(NW67 to SR826), NW 72nd(SR836 to NW25), NW 67th Av.(SR948 to
NW25), NW

25th(SR826 to NW67)

**PARSEC(NORTH) - MIAMI** Truck/Rail

Hialeah xpressway (NW 72nd St to R 826)

**PARSEC (EAST COAST RR) -JACKSONVILLE** Truck/Rail

US 1 (Entrance to University Blvd.), University Blvd. (US 1 to I-95)

**JACKSONVILLE INTL AIRPORT** Airport

SR 102 (Entrance to I-95)

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN YARDS** Truck/Rail

Old Kings Rd. (Entrance to US 23), US 23 (Old Kings Rd. to I-95)

**JACKSONVILLE PORT AUTHORITY** Port

Talleyrand Ave. to 21 st St. to Phoenix Ave. to US 1 Alt. to I-95)

**JACKSONVILLE PORT AUTHORITY - BLOUNT** Port

Dave Rawls Blvd.

**CSXT BULK INTERMODAL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Sportsman Club Rd (Entrance tp Pritchard Rd.), Pritchard Rd. (Sportsman
Cl. to I-95)

**PORT OF TAMPA** Port

Wynkoop Rd. (Port to Grant), Grant St. (Wynkoop to 22nd), 22nd St.
(Grant to I-4), 21st St (Grant

**TAMPA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route - SR 60

**FT. LAUDERDALE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PARSEC - FT. LAUDERDALE** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PARSEC - WEST PALM BEACH** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF FERNANDINA** Port

Dade St (Entrance to 8th), 8th St. (Dade SR A1A), SR A1A (8th to I-95)

**Facility Type**

**PORT OF FORT PIERCE** Port

US 1 (Facility \@SR A1A to SR 608)

**PORT OF PANAMA CITY** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route - US 98

**PORT OF KEY WEST** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route - US 1

**[Georgia]{.underline}**

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, ALBANY** Truck/Pipeline

From SR 62 / US 19 Business: west 0.5 mi on SR 234 to the front of the
terminal

**HARTSFIELD INTL. AIRPORT, ATLANTA** Airport

I-85 exit 18-A, NE 1.25 mi on CR 2045; and 0.41 mi on CS 800111 to the N
Cargo Building

I-75 exit 82, W 0.07 mi to Aviation Blvd.(Cr 1516), N 0.7 mi on CR 1568
and 0.68 mi on CS

800111 to N Cargo Building

I-75 exit 82, 0.41 mi on CR 2296 and 1.21 mi on CR 1516 to Dead end.

**ATLANTA HULSEY RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

From I-20(ex 26): north 0.5 miles on CS052003 to the truck/rail facility

**ATLANTA INMAN RAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

From I-285: S 1.3 mi on S. Cobb Dr. and SR 280, NE 1.0 mi on Bolton Rd,
SE 2.3 mi on Marietta Rd

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN RAIL YARD, ATLANTA** Truck/Rail

From Lakewood Freeway (SR 166) Sylvan Rd exit Right 0.1 mi and left on
Lakewood Ave 0.4 mi to

terminal

**CHATTAHOOCHEE COLONIAL PIPELINE, ATLANTA** Truck/Pipeline

From S. Cobb Dr. and SR 280: S 0.9 mi on Bolton Rd, N 0.2 mi on Parrot
Avenue

**DORAVILLE COLONIAL & PLANTATION PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

From I-285, Exit #25 North on Buford Highway (SR 13) 0.3 mile to
Longmire Way, left 0.2 mile to

Winters Chapel/Flowers Road, left and right to rail, truck, and pipeline
gates.

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, MACON** Truck/Pipeline

From I-475: E 2.7 mi on Zebulon Rd (CR 726), NE 0.4 on SR 19, to
pipeline terminal

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, SOUTH MACON** Truck/Pipeline

From I-75: E 2.9 mi on Hartley Bridge Rd, S 0.4 mi on Houston Rd, E 1.1
mi on CR 738 to SR 247

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, ROME** Truck/Pipeline

From SR-1 Loop: north 2.1 mi on CR 796 to the terminal yard

**GARDEN TERMINAL, SAVANNAH** Port

From SR 21: E 1.1 mi on SR 307 and N 0.50 mi on SR 25 to port entrance

From I-516, north 2.7mi on SR 25 to SR 307

**OCEAN TERMINAL, SAVANNAH** Port

From W Lathrop Ave (CR 1142); SE 0.65 mi on Lathrop Ave (Cr 740) and
0.16 mi on River St

(CS-014507) to the terminal

**CSX RAILYARD, SAVANNAH** Truck/Rail

From I-516: N&W 0.70 mi on Tremont Rd, N 0.1 mi on Tremont Ave, W 0.2 mi
on Safety First Rd

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, AMERICUS** Truck/Pipeline

From SR 27/U.S. 19: southwest 0.4 mi on U.S. 280 to the pipeline
terminal

**COLONIAL PIPELINE, GRIFFIN** Truck/Pipeline

From SR3/US19: E 0.4 mi on East McIntosh Rd, N 0.4 mi on Old Atlanta Rd,
E 1.3 mi on McIntosh

**Facility Type**

**DIXIE PIPELINE, MILNER** Truck/Pipeline

From I-75: SW 7.9 mi on SR 36, SW 3.0 mi on Liberty Hill St, N 2.6 on
Old 41 Highway

**COLONEL'S ISLAND TERMINAL, BRUNSWICK** Port

From SR-520/US 17 north on CR 1108, 1.0 mi to the

Terminal

**COLONEL'S ISLAND TERMINAL, BRUNSWICK** Truck/Rail

From SR-520/ US 17; North 0.6 mi on Public Road 1108 to the Rail Yard
Gates

**[Hawaii]{.underline}**

**HONOLULU INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

H-1 Freeway on-ramp to Terminal

**HONOLULU HARBOR** Port

Forest Ave. (Ala Moana Blvd to terminal)

**KAHULUI AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Access Extension (Terminal to Kuihelani Hwy) - proposed

**KAHULUI HARBOR** Port

Ala Luina Street (Hobron Ave to terminal)

**HILO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Access Rd

**HILO HARBOR** Port

Kuhio Street/Kalanianaole Avenue

**KAWAIHAE HARBOR** Port

Kawaihoe Rd (Akoni Pule Hwy to Queen Kaahumanu Hwy)

**KEAHOLE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Access Rd.(Queen Kaahumanu Highway to Terminal)

**LIHUE AIRPORT** Airport

Ahukini Road (End of NHS Route to terminal)

**NAWILIWILI HARBOR** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**KAPALAMA BASIN PORT TERMINAL** Port

Kukahi Street (Terminal to Nimitz Hwy)

**BARBERS POINT DEEP DRAFT HARBOR** Port

Malakole Road and Kalaeloa Blvd.

**[Idaho]{.underline}**

**CURTIS RD PIPELINE TERMINAL** Truck/Pipeline

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF LEWISTON** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**[Illinois]{.underline}**

**SCHILLER PARK EAST** Truck/Rail

Lawrence Ave. (Entrance to US 45)

**BENSENVILLE** Truck/Rail

Entrance on Franklin Ave. to Williams Dr. to Belmont Ave. to US 45

**Facility Type**

**GLOBAL TWO** Truck/Rail

US 20 (Entrance to I-294)

Railroad Ave. (US 20 to Il 64)

**CICERO/BN - CECO** Truck/Rail

28th St. (Entrance to Il 50

**CICERO/BN - OGDEN** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**GLOBAL ONE** Truck/Rail

15th St. (Entrance to Ashland Ave), Ashland Ave. (15th to Frontage),
Frontage Rd (Ashland to

Ashland Ave. (15th to I-55)

**WESTERN AVE BURLINGTON NORTHERN** Truck/Rail

Blue Island (Western to Ashland), Damen (Blue Island to 30th)

31st (Western to California), California (31st to I-55) - proposed

**26TH ST./UNION PACIFIC** Truck/Rail

Canal St (Entrance to Archer), Archer Av. (Canal to Cermak), Cermak
(Archer to I-90/94)

Canal St.(Archer to 18th St), 18th St (Canal to I-90/94)

**RAILPORT - CANADIEN NATIONAL** Truck/Rail

43rd St. (Entrance to Ashland), Ashland Ave.(43rd to I-55)

Ashland Ave (43rd to 47th), 47th St (Ashland Ave to I-90/94)

47th St (Ashland to Western Ave)

**CANADIEN NATIONAL - LUMBER** Truck/Rail

51st St.(Entrance to Kedzie), Kedzie Ave (51st to 47th)

**CORWITH /BN AND SF** Truck/Rail

Kedzie Ave (Entrance @ 41St to I-55)

Kedzie Ave (Entrance to 47th), 47th St (Kedzie to Western)

47th St (Kedzie to Pulaski), Pulaski (47th to I-55), 41st St (Entrance
to Pulaski)

**47TH YARD - CONRAIL** Truck/Rail

51st St. (Entrance to I-90/94)

47th St. (Normal to I-90/94) - mileage included with 11R

**63RD YARD - CONRAIL** Truck/Rail

63rd St (Entrance to I-90/94), Frontage (63rd to I-90/94)

61st St (Entrance to State), State St (59th to 63rd), 59th (State to
Frontage)

**FOREST HILL - CSX INTERMODAL** Truck/Rail

79th St. (Entrance to Western Ave.)

**LANDERS - NORFOLK SOUTHERN** Truck/Rail

79th St. (Cicero to Western)

**BEDFORD PARK - CSX INTERMODAL** Truck/Rail

71st St. (Entrance to IL 43)

Frontage Rd. (Entrance to IL 43)

Sayer (71st to 73rd), 73rd (Sayer to Cicero)

Central (Entrance to 73rd)

**WILLOW SPRINGS/HODGKINS/BN/SF** Truck/Rail

75th St. (Entrance to I-294)

Santa Fe Dr (Entrance to 67th), 67th St (Santa Fe to US 45)

**Facility Type**

**IOWA INTERSTATE** Truck/Rail

119th St. (Wolcott to I-57)

**YARD CENTER/UNION PACIFIC** Truck/Rail

Sibley Rd. (Entrance to I-94)

**MARKHAM/IC/WC/SP** Truck/Rail

Center St (Entrance to 167th), 167th St.(Center to Halsted), Halstead
(167th to I-80)

Center St. (167th to 159th)

Center (Entrance to 171st), 171st St (Center to Halstead)

**FEDERAL MARINE** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**IMX/SP** Truck/Rail

Damen St. (30th Ave to I-55)

**TRIPLE CROWN - NORFOLK SOUTHERN** Truck/Rail

103rd St. (Stoney Islan Rd to I-94)

**AUTO-TRANSLOAD - BN/SANTE FE** Truck/Rail

Fort Hill (Entrance to Jefferson), Jefferson Ave. (Fort Hill IL 59)

Fort Hill (Entrance to Aurora/Dupage), Aurora/Dupage Ave (Fort Hill to
IL 59)

**WATER TERMINAL 1 - CALUMET RIVER** Port

103rd St. (Torrence to Stoney Island then to I-94)

106th ST (Indianapolis Blvd to Torrence)

**WATER TERMINAL 2 - LAKE CALUMET** Port

Stoney Island (Entrance to 103rd St/I-94 Ramps)

122nd St (Stoney Island to Torrence)

Stoney Island (Entrance to 130th)

**WATER TERMINAL 3 - KCBX CLUSTER** Port

100th St. (Entrance to Indianapolis), Indianapolis (100th to US 12/20)

100th St (Entrance to Torrence)

**PEORIA MIDWEST TRANSPORTATION SERVICES-P&PU** Truck/Rail

Oxford (Entrance to Wesley), Wesley (Oxford to Main), Main (Wesley to IL
8/116)

**GATEWAY WESTERN RAILWAY INTERMODAL YARD** Truck/Rail

Main St (Entrance to IL 3)

**ROSE LAKE INTERMODAL YARD-CONRAIL** Truck/Rail

Collinsville Rd (Entrance to IL 203), IL 203(Collinsville to I-55)

**UNION PACIFIC MOTOR FREIGHT INTERMODAL YARD** Truck/Rail

Carondelet St (Entrance to Main), Main St (Carondelet to IL 3)

**PEORIA BARGE TERMINAL** Port

Sanger St (Entrance to US 24)

**O\'HARE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

No Connection Needed

**GREATER PEORIA REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Dirksen Rd (Entrance to Airport Rd ), Airport Rd (Dirksen to I-474)

**59TH STREET CSX** Truck/Rail

Dirksen (Entrance to Airport Rd), Airport Rd (Dirksen to I-474)

**Facility Type**

**GATEWAY** Truck/Rail

West (Entrance to 159th)

West (Entrance to 157th), 157th (West to Park), Park (157th to 155th)

Commercial (157th to 155th), 155th (Commercial to Halstead), Halstead
(155th to 167th)

**[Indiana]{.underline}**

**TO MULTIPLE PORTS IN OHIO ON OHIO RIVER** Port

From I-275: northeast on U.S 50 to Ohio State Border

**SOUTHWINDS MARITIME CENTRE** Port

From SH 69 bypass: west 1.3 mi on SH 62 to Southwind Port Road at the
port entrance

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN TRIPLE CROWN RR FACIL.** Truck/Rail

From U.S. 30: south on Coliseum Blvd, west on Pontiac St, and Northwest
on Wayne Trace to

**AVON CONRAIL INTERMODAL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

From I-465/I-74 (exit 13): west on U.S. 36, south on Dan Jones Road to
terminal

**INDIANAPOLIS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From I-465/I-74 (exit 11): west 0.3 mi on Airport Expressway to terminal
entrance

From I-465/I-74 (exit 12): west 4.1 mi on U.S. 40 to Six Points Road (CR
1050E)

**OHIO RIVER INTERMODAL TERMINAL GROUPING** Port

From SH 62: southwesterly 0.9 mi on Ray Becker Parkway to South Barker
Avenue

From SH 62: south 0.1 mi on Wabash Avenue to port

From SH 62: south 0.1 mi on Fulton Avenue to port

**HULMAN REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From I-70 (exit 11): north 2.3 mi on SH 46, east 1.5 mi on Poplar St (SH
42) to airport entrance

**CLARK MARITIME CENTRE** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**U.S. STEEL PORT** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF INDIANA** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**[Iowa]{.underline}**

**CONTINENTAL GRAIN CO., DUBUQUE** Port

Kerper Blvd, E 16th St, E 11th St, E 9th St, 9th-11th W Conn, between
the Terminal and US 61/151

**HARVEST STATES PEAVEY, DUBUQUE** Port

E 7th St, Central Ave and White St between the Terminal and Commercial
St

**DETERMANN INDUSTRIES, CAMANCHE** Port

Washington Blvd, US 67 between the Terminal and US 30

**QUAD CITIES CONTAINER TERMINAL, DAVENPORT** Truck/Rail

S Rolff St, Rockingham Rd(IA 22), between the Terminal and I-280

**HARVEST STATES PEAVEY, DAVENPORT** Port

IA 22 between the Terminal and I-280

**AMOCO PIPELINE DISTRIBUTION CENTER, COUNCIL** Truck/Pipeline

**BLUFFS**

US 275 (eastern ramp termini I-29 to South Expressway), then North to
the Westbound ramp

terminus of I-29/80.

**Facility Type**

**DES MOINES INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Fleur Dr between ML King Blvd and proposed relocated of IA 5

Park Ave (63rd to Fleur Dr)

**RAIL INTERMODAL SPECIALIST, DES MOINES** Truck/Rail

IA 46/Vandalia Rd (IA 163 to US 65) (same as 9L)

**VANDALIA RD PIPELINE, DES MOINES** Truck/Pipeline

IA 46/Vandalia Rd (IA 163 to US 65)

**CEDAR RAPIDS AIRPORT** Airport

Wright Brothers Blvd between I-380 and Cherry Valley Rd

**AGRI GRAIN MARKETING, MCGREGOR** Port

IA 76, B St between the Terminal and US 18

**WILLIAMS PIPELINE CO., SIOUX CITY** Truck/Pipeline

41st St & 46th St & Business US 75 (Lewis Blvd) Between the Terminal and
US 75

**BIG SOO TERMINAL, SIOUX CITY** Port

Harbor Dr & Industrial Rd between the Terminal and I-29

**[Kansas]{.underline}**

**MID-CONTINENT AIRPORT, WICHITA** Airport

From U.S. 54: South 1.9 mi on Mid-Continental Drive and 0.5 mi on Air
Cargo Rd

**SANTE FE TERMINAL, KANSAS CITY** Truck/Rail

From I-635 (ex 3): E 0.5 mi on K-32, S 0.1 mi on 39th, E 0.1 mi on
Fairbanks, S 0.1 mi on 38th

From U.S. 69: W 1.3 mi on K-32 to 39th St (links to connector 1)

**SOUTHERN PACIFIC\'S KS CITY I\'MDL FAC.** Truck/Rail

From I-635 (ex 3): E 1.7 mi on K-32 (conn for SF Term), N 0.2 mi on
18th, W 0.3 mi on Baynard

From U.S. 69: follow 18th St N and Baynard Ave W - as in connector #1 to
terminal (no addl mi)

**WILLIAMS PIPELINE TERMINAL** Truck/Pipeline

From I-635 (ex 8): E 2.2 mi on K-5, E 1.1 mi on Sunshine Rd, S 1.0 on
Fairfax Trwy, E/N 0.5 mi on

Donovan

From I-70 (ex 423): N 1.7 mi on Fairfax Trafficway to Donovan Rd (links
to Connector 1)

**[Kentucky]{.underline}**

**OWENSBORO RIVERPORT** Port

KY 331 (US 60 to Harbor Rd), Harbor Rd (KY 331 to Facility)

**CAMPGROUND RD PETROLEUM PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

Campground Rd (Cane Run to Ralph), Kramers Ln (Cane Run to Campground),
Ralph Ave (Cane

Run to Campground Rd)

**BELLS LANE PETROLEUM/CHEMICAL PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

KY 2056 from I-264 W to the Louisville-Ohio river Floodwall

**LOUISVILLE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Grade Ln (I-264 to UPS Feedor Truck Entrance), FS 8879 (I-264 to
Facilty)

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN INTERMODAL - LOUISVILLE** Truck/Rail

Newburg Rd (I-264 to Bishop), Bishop Ln (Newburg to Jennings), Jennings
Ln (Bishop to

**CINCINNATI/N KY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

KY 212 from I-275 S to the Airport Roadway System

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN INTERMODAL - GEORGETOWN** Truck/Rail

KY 620 - Facility to I-75 Interchange

**Facility Type**

**LOUISVILLE/ASHLAND OIL/CHEVRON DIST. CENTER** Truck/Pipeline

KY 1681 - KY 4 Interchange to Facility

**TRUCK TO BARGE COAL DOCK CLUSTER, BOYD CNTY** Port

KY 757 from US 23 near Lockwood to 2.3 Miles North

**GOLDEN OAK MINING CO.** Truck/Rail

KY 7 (KY 15 to KY 931), KY 931 (KY 7 to Facility)

**MCCOY ELKHORN COAL CORP** Truck/Rail

KY 194 - US 119 to Facility

**IVEL COAL TIPPLE** Truck/Rail

County Rd 1020 - US 23 to Facility

**PRAISE DOCK COAL TIPPLE** Truck/Rail

KY 80 from US 460 to Facility

**CLARK ELKHORN COAL TIPPLE** Truck/Rail

KY 1441 (US 460 to Clark Elkhorn Tipple #1 Ent), KY 1789 ( US 460 to KY
1441)

**CAMPGROUND RD PETROLEUM PORT** Port

Same as 5L

**BELLS LANE PETROLEUM/CHEMICAL PORT** Port

KY 2056 - Louisville-Ohio Floodwall to I-264 - Same as KY 6L

**[Louisiana]{.underline}**

**PORT OF BATON ROUGE** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF LAKE CHARLES - CITY DOCKS** Port

Marine Rd (Terminal to Sallier St), Proposed New Access Rd (Sallier St
to Prien lake Rd), LA

1138-2 (Prien Lake Rd to I-210)

**PORT OF LAKE CHARLES - BULK TERMINAL** Port

Coke Plant Rd. to Bayou D\'Inde to LA 108 to I-10

**PORT OF LAKE CHARLES - SOUTH SIDE TER.** Port

Big Lake Rd to Country Club Rd. to Nelson Rd (LA 1138) to I-210

**NEW ORLEANS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Rd. (Entrance to Veterans Memorial Blvd), Veterans Mem Blvd
(Airport Rd. to LA 49)

Crofton Rd. (Entrance to US 61)

**UNION PACIFIC - AVONDALE TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Avondale Garden Rd. (Terminal to US 90)

**BNSF - WESTWEGO TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Bridge City Ave{LA 18} (Terminal to US 90)

**KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN - METAIRE TER.** Truck/Rail

Labarre Rd. (Terminal to US 61)

**ILLINOIS CENTRAL - NEW ORLEANS TER.** Truck/Rail

Tchoupitoulas St.(Terminal to US 90) and Felicity St. to Religious St to
Tchoupitoulas St - Same as

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN - NEW ORLEANS TER.** Truck/Rail

Florida Ave. (Terminal to LA 3021)

**Facility Type**

**CSX - NEW ORLEANS TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Almonaster Rd (Terminal to Alvar Rd)

Almonaster Ave (Terminal to I-510)

**PORT OF NEW ORLEANS - FRANCE ROAD TER.** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF NEW ORLEANS - JOURDAN ROAD TER.** Port

Jourdan Rd. (Terminal to Almonaster Rd.)

**PORT OF NEW ORLEANS - DOWNTOWN WHARVES** Port

Chartres St.(From Poland St.) to Ferdinand to N. Peters to Esplanade to
Elysian Fields to LA 46

**PORT OF NEW ORLEANS - MISS. RIVER TERM.** Port

Felicity St (Terminal to Religious St), Religious St (Felicity to
Euterpe), Tchoupitoulas St (felecity

to US 90)

**SHREVEPORT REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Monkhouse Rd. (Terminal to I-20)

**UNION PACIFIC - REISOR TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

LA 526 (Terminal to I-20)

**PORT FOURCHON** Port

Fourchon Rd (Waterfront to Chevron Canal), LA 3090 (Chevron Canal to LA
1)

**KCS - DERAMUA YARD** Truck/Rail

LA 173 9terminal to I-220)

**[Maine]{.underline}**

**PORTLAND FREIGHT TERMINAL DISTRICT** Truck/Rail

From I-95 (exit 7): south 2.1 mi on ME Turnpike Approach Road to U.S. 1

**MERRILL MARINE TERMINAL (PORT)** Port

From I-295 (exit 5): 0.8 mi E on SR 22/Congress St, 0.8 mi S on U.S. 1,
0.2 mi E on U.S. 1A

From I-295 (exit 4): 1.0 E on U.S. 1A to intersection with U.S.1 (and
join connector #1)

**AUBURN INTERODAL TRUCK/RAIL TRANSFER FAC** Truck/Rail

From I-495 (ex 12)/SW on SR 4: NW 1.9 mi on Kittyhawk Rd, northerly 0.7
mi on Lewiston Jct Rd

**MERRILL MARINE TERMINAL (RAIL)** Truck/Rail

From I-295 (exit 5): 0.8 mi E on SR 22/Congress St, 0.8 mi S on U.S. 1,
0.2 mi E on U.S. 1A (same as

From I-295 (exit 4): 1.0 E on U.S. 1A to intersection with U.S.1 (and
join connector #1) same as 4P

**HAPAG LLOYD CONTAINER TERMINAL** Port

From connector terminating at Merrill Marine Terminal: NE 1.0 mi on U.S.
1A to Park St (Term.

**[Maryland]{.underline}**

**CSX INTERMODAL CONTAINER FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Vail St (Keith to CSX Gate), New Vail St (Keith to Newgate ), Keith Ave
MU5857 (Broening to

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN BAYVIEW TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Eastern Ave(I-95 to Ponca), Ponca St(Eastern to Lombard), Lombard(Kane
to Haven), Kane

St(Northpoint to Dundalk), Northpoint Blvd(I-695 to Kane), Haven
St(Lombard to Pulaski),

Kresson St(Lombard to Pulaski)

**Facility Type**

**SHELL OIL FACILTY** Truck/Pipeline

E. Patapsco Ave(Pennington to Fairfield), Fairfield Rd(Patapsco to
Northbridge), Northbridge

Ave(Fairfield to Asiatic), Asiatic Ave(Northbridge to Shell Oil)

Pennington Ave(Birch to Patapsco), Curtis Ave(Birch to Patapsco), Birch
St(Pennington to

Hanover St(I-95 to Frankfurst), Frankfurst Ave(Rt 2 to I-895), Potee
St(I-95 to

Frankfurst),Frankfurst Ave - MD47P (Hanover to Vera), Shell
Rd(Frankfurst to Papapsco)

**EXXON OIL FACILITY** Truck/Pipeline

Newkirk St (Newgate to Boston), further access to this terminal provided
by MD39R

**DUNDALK/SEAGIRT MARINE TERMINAL** Port

Dundalk Ave. (Holabird to Eastern), Holabird Ave(Ponca to Dundalk)

**NORTH LOCUST POINT MARINE TERMINAL** Port

McComas St - MU 4320 (Hanover to Andre)

**SOUTH LOCUST POINT MARINE TERMINAL** Port

Access to this terminal provided by MD43P

**RUKERT/HALE INTERMODAL TERMINAL** Port

Clinton St (Boston to Keith)Access to this terminal is provided by Keith
Ave, listed under

**FAIRFIELD PRIVATE TERMINALS** Port

Frankfurst Ave(Hanover to Vera), Vera St(Frankfurst to Chesapeake),
Chesapeake Ave(Vera to

Fairfield), Childs St(Frankfurst to Terminal)

**CURTIS BAY EAST BULK TERMINALS** Port

Pennington Ave/Hawkins Point Rd(Birch to Anne Arundel County), Chemical
Rd (Hawkins Pt to

Terminal), Quarantine Rd(Hawkins Pt to I-695)

**CURTIS BAY WEST OIL TERMINALS** Port

Access provided by MD40L

**BWI AIRPORT** Airport

Camp Meade Rd (Dorsey to Aviation), Aviation Blvd (Camp Meade to I-97)

**JESSUP AUTO DISTRIBUTION FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Dorsey Run Rd(MD 175 to MD 32), MD 175 (I-95 to Dorsey Run Rd)

**SUPPORT TERMINAL SERVICES** Port

Access provided by MS47P

**STRATUS PETROLEUM** Port

Access provided by MD45P & MD47P

**CHESAPEAKE TERMINAL** Port

Access provided by MD45P & MD47P

**[Massachusetts]{.underline}**

**AYER BOSTON & MAINE RR YARD** Truck/Rail

Willow Rd to Route 2A/110 to Route 110/111

**BEACON PARK YARD** Truck/Rail

Yard to Cambridge St. to I-90

**BLACK FALCON CRUISE TERMINAL** Port

Served by an existing NHS route

**CONLEY TERMINAL - PORT OF BOSTON** Port

Served by an existing NHS route

**Facility Type**

**LOGAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Rt 1A to Main Airport Loop Rd

Airfield to S Gate to Harborside St to the Main Airport Loop

Airfield to N Gate to Frankfort St to Prescott St to Cottage St to SR 2
main Airport Loop Rd

Connector 18A3 to to Frankfort St to Neptune St to Bennington St to Rt
1A

**MORAN TERMINAL - PORT OF BOSTON** Port

Yard to Chelsea St connector to Chelsea St to Rt 99

**RT. 1A PETRO TERMINALS - BOSTON (VARIOUS)** Port

Served by an existing NHS route

**FT. DEVENS INTERMODAL RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Barnum Rd. to Rt 110/111

**PORT OF NEW BEDFORD** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**W. SPRINGFIELD CONRAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Yard to Day St to Union St to Rt 20 (Park Ave)

**WESTBOROUGH CONRAIL AUTO YARD** Truck/Rail

Walkup St. to Flanders Rd. to Connector Rd. to lyon St. to Computer Dr.
to Rt 9

Walkup St. to Flanders Rd. to Connector Dr. to Research Dr. to Rt 9

**WORCESTER P&W YARD - SOUTHBRIDGE ST.** Truck/Rail

Yard to Southbridge St. to Cambridge St

Yard to Southbridge St to Quinsigamond Ave

**WORCESTER P&W YARD - WISER AVE** Truck/Rail

Yard to Millbury St (NB) to RT 146

Yard to Millbury St (SB) to Rt 146

**WORCESTER TVT CONRAIL YARD** Truck/Rail

Yard to Franklin St to Grafton St

**[Michigan]{.underline}**

**DETROIT JCT/LIVERNOIS INTERMODAL TER.** Truck/Rail

Mercier St. (Wyoming to Dix Ave.), Wyoming Ave. (Mercier to US-12),

**LOWER DETROIT RIVER PORT** Port

Jefferson Ave (Port to Dragoon)

Clark Str. (Port to Fort St)

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN - DELRAY** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**LOWER RIVER ROUGE - PORT #1** Port

Marion Industrial Hwy (Port to Jefferson Ave.)

**LOWER RIVER ROUGE - PORT #2** Port

Brennan Ave. (Port to Jefferson Ave.)

**UPPER RIVER ROUGE - PORT #1** Port

Forman Ave to Flora St. to Reisner Ave. to Fort Str.

**UPPER RIVER ROUGE - PORT #2** Port

Dix Ave.(Port to Livernois Ave), Oakwood(Dix to Schaffer), Schaffer
Hwy(Oakwood to I-75)

Dix Ave (Port to Livernois Ave)

**Facility Type**

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN - OAKWOOD** Truck/Rail

Hess St. (Terminal to Schaffer), Schaffer Hwy (Hess St to I-75)

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN - TRIPLE CROWN** Truck/Rail

S. Wabash St. to Dix Ave (Outer Dr. to Schaffer Hwy to I-75)

**UPPER DETROIT RIVER PORT #1** Port

Atwater (Entrance to St. Aubin St.), St. Aubin St. (Atwater to
Jefferson)

**UPPER DETROIT RIVER PORT #2** Port

Atwater St.(Entrance to Riopelle), Riopelle St.(Atwater to Jefferson)

**DETROIT - CP RAIL SYSTEM OAK YARD** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**DETROIT - WILLOW RUN AIRPORT** Airport

US 12 (Entrance to I-94)

**FERNDALE - CN NORTH AMERICA MOTERM** Truck/Rail

Fern St.(Terminal to Fair St.), Fair St.(Fern to M-102)

**GRAND RAPIDS - KENT CO. INTL AIRPORT** Airport

44th St. (M 37 to Patterson), Patterson Ave (44th to M 11)

**FLINT - BISHOP AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**LANSING - CAPITOL CITY AIRPORT** Airport

Capitol City Blvd.(Entrance to Grand River Blvd)

**MARQUETTE PORT** Port

Hampton St.(Terminal to US 41/M-28)

**SAGINAW RIVER - LOWER (PORT) #1** Port

Marquette St. (Port to Truman Pkwy)

**SAGINAW RIVER - LOWER (PORT) #2** Port

Woodside Dr. (Pine St to Trumbell St.)

**SAGINAW RIVER - UPPER (PORT) #1** Port

Westervelt Rd. (Port to Kochville), Kochville Rd (Westervelt to Adams),
Adams Rd.(Kochville to

**SAGINAW RIVER - UPPER (PORT) #2** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**ST. JOSEPH PORT** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**WOODHAVEN - APL** Truck/Rail

King Rd. (Terminal to Allen Rd), Allen Rd (King Rd to West Rd.)

**NEW BOSTON AUTO RAMP** Truck/Rail

Sibley Rd. (Terminal to I-275)

**[Minnesota]{.underline}**

**MINNEAPOLIS/ST. PAUL AIRPORT** Airport

TH 5 (TH 55 to Post Rd.)

**DULUTH SEA PORT** Port

From I-535: NW 0.9 mi on Garfield Road to Railroad Street

**[Mississippi]{.underline}**

**Facility Type**

**PORT OF PASCAGOULA (EAST)** Port

From US 90: Southerly 3.8 mi on MS 611 to port

**PORT OF VICKSBURG (NORTH)** Port

From US 61: S 4.3 mi on Washington St to Connector #2, to 1.5 miles S on
Mulberry St, Dorsey St,

and Levve St

From I-20: W 2.6 mi on Clay St, Cherry St, & 1st East St, then N 1.8 mi
on Washington and W 2.9

miles on Haining Rd

**PORT OF BILOXI** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF GREENVILLE** Port

From U.S. 82: southwesterly 2.8 mi on Harbor Front Road to port entrance

**PORT OF GULFPORT** Port

From U.S. 90: south 0.6 mi on port access road to port

From I-10: south 0.1 mi on Canal Rd, 5.6 SE mi on new location, S 2.4 mi
30th Ave Ext to port

**PORT OF COLUMBUS** Port

From U.S. 82: southerly 2.7 mi on port access road to port

**PORT OF ITAWAMBA** Port

From U.S. 78: north 0.3 mi on MS 25, west 0.6 mi on South Access Route
to port

**PORT OF NATCHEZ** Port

Government Fleet Rd (US 65 to Providence), Providence Rd (Govt Fleet to
River Terminal Rd),

River Terminal Rd (Providence to Port)

**PORT OF YAZOO** Port

MS 3 (US 49W to River Rd), River Rd (MS 3 to Levee Rd), Levee Rd (River
Rd to port)

**PORT OF BIENVILLE** Port

From U.S. 90/MS 607: SW 3.8 mi on U.S.90, then southerly on 6.0 mi on
Ansley Rd to Port

**PORT OF ARMORY** Port

From U.S. 45: E 5.7 mi on U.S. 278, N 0.6 mi on Waterway Dr, W 0.2 mi on
Port Access Road to

**JACKSON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From I-20 (ex 52): Northerly 2.8 mi on MS 475 to Airport Road to Airport

**IC RAILROAD** Truck/Rail

N Mill St. (Facility to W. Wilson), Woodrow Wilson (N Mill to I-55)

Pearl/Pascagoula St (one way pair) from I-55 to Mill St then North to IC
Railroad

**PORT OF PASCAGOULA (WEST)** Port

From US 90: N Access Ramp onto E-Bound loop under US 90 0.4 mi to S
access Ramp & S 0.85 mi

on River Edge Rd plus 0.5 mi onw-way S then 0.5 mi one-way, then 0.35 mi
SE to Port

**PORT OF VICKSBURG (SOUTH)** Port

From US 61: S 4.3 mi on Washington St to Connector #2, to 1.5 miles S on
Mulberry St, Dorsey St,

and Levve St (same as 2P)

From I-20: W 2.6 mi on Clay St, Cherry St, & 1st East St, then N 1.8 mi
on Washington and W 2.9

miles on Haining Rd (same as 2P)

**PORT OF ROSEDALE** Port

Port Access Rd to Russell Crutcher to MS 8 to US 61

**[Missouri]{.underline}**

**LAMBERT INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT, ST. LOUIS** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**Facility Type**

**KANSAS CITY INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From I-29/435 (ex 15): S 1.5 mi on Mexico City Ave to Air Cargo Facility
on Paris Street

**SPRINGFIELD REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Directly Accessible from NHS

**MULTIPLE PORTS ON MS RIVER, ST. LOUIS** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**SEMO PORT, SCOTT CITY** Port

From I-55 (exit 91): Easterly 4.0 mi on Route AB to entrance to Semo
Port

**KANSAS CITY SOUTHERN, KANSAS CITY** Truck/Rail

South on Chouteau frwy from Route 210. Shared connector with 7R

**UNION PACIFIC, KANSAS CITY** Truck/Rail

From Route 210 intermodal connector: S 2.0 mi on Chouteau Trafficway to
facility entr on Gardner

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN/TRIPLE CROWN, KC** Truck/Rail

From I-29/35 (ex 6B): E 5.5 mi on Route 210 to Facility Entrance

From State Route 291: SW 4.5 mi on Route 210 to facility entrance

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN, KANSAS CITY** Truck/Rail

From I-29/35 (ex 6B): E 5.5 mi on Route 210 to Facility Entrance (Same
as 8R)

From State Route 291: SW 4.5 mi on Route 210 to facility entrance (Same
as 8R)

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN/TRIPLE CROWN, ST. LOUIS** Truck/Rail

From I-70 (exit 246): NE 0.3 mi on Adelaide, NW 1.5 mi on Hall to
intermodal facility

From I-270 (exit 34): SW 5.7 mi on Riverview Dr and continuing on Hall
Street to terminal

**PORT OF ST. LOUIS #2** Port

7th St. (I-55/44 to I-55)

**[Nebraska]{.underline}**

**EPPLEY AIRPORT** Airport

Fort Court (Abbott to Lockheed Ct), Lockheed Ct (Fort Court to Post
Office)

**WILLIAMS PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

11th St (Terminal to Izard), Izard (11th to 14th), 14th St (Izard to
I-480)

**UNION PACIFIC RAILROAD** Truck/Rail

Leavenworth (Terminal to 14th), 14th (Leavenworth to I-480), 13th
(Leavenworth to I-480)

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD** Truck/Rail

Gibson St (Terminal to Missouri), Missouri (Gibson to 12th), 12th St
(Missouri to J), J St (12th to

13th), 13th St (J to I-80)

**[Nevada]{.underline}**

**MCCARRAN INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Connector (Entrance to I-215)

**RENO TAHOE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Plumb Ln. ( Entrance to I-580)

**[New Hampshire]{.underline}**

**MANCHESTER AIRPORT** Airport

From I-293 (exit 3): S 1.4 mi on Brown Ave (SR 3A) to airport

**PORT OF PORTSMOUTH** Port

From I-95 (ex 6): E 0.7 mi on Market Street to the Port

**Facility Type**

**[New Jersey]{.underline}**

**RAIL TERMINAL AT PULASKI SKYWAY** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT NEWARK RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF JERSEY CITY** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**UNION CITY RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT ELIZABETH RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT NEWARK** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**NEWARK INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**NEWARK RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CAMDEN (NORTH)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CAMDEN (CENTRAL)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CAMDEN (SOUTH)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**[New Mexico]{.underline}**

**ALBUQUERQUE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**[New York]{.underline}**

**STEWART INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Breunig Rd. (A St. to NY 207), NY 207 (Breunig to NY 300), NY 300 (NY
207 to I-84)

NY 207 (Breunig Rd. to CR 54), CR 54 (NY 207 to I-84)

**WEST SIDE PASSENGER SHIP PIERS** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**KENNEDY AIRPORT** Airport

Guy Brewer Blvd. (Entrance to Rockaway Blvd)

Farmers Blvd. (Entrance to Rockaway Blvd.)

150th St. (Entrance to N. Conduit Ave.),

Lefferts Blvd. (Entrance to N. Conduit Ave.)

**65TH STREET INTERMODAL TERMINAL** Port

65th St. (Entrance at 2nd Ave. to Gowanus Expressway)

**HARLEM RIVER INTERMODAL YARD** Truck/Rail

Brown Pl from Entrance to E. 132nd St to Alexander Ave. to E. 135th St.
to I-87

Brown Pl (entrance to E 134th St.), E. 134th St. (Brown Pl. to I-87 SB)

**Facility Type**

**BRONX TERMINAL MARKET** Truck/Rail

E. 151st St. (Entrance to Grand Concourse)

E.151st St. (Entrance to River), River Ave. (E. 151st to E. 157th ), E.
157th St. (River to I-87 NB)

E. 151st St. (Entrance to River), River (E. 151st to E 153rd), E. 153rd
St. (River to I-87 SB)

**SOUTH BROOKLYN MARINE TERMINAL** Port

2nd Ave. (terminal to 39th St.), 39th St (2nd Ave. to Gowanus Pkwy)

**RED HOOK CONTAINER TERMINAL** Port

Union Street (Van Burnt St. Entrance to Columbia St.)

**65TH STREET LIRR BAY RIDGE TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

65th St. (2nd Ave. Entrance to Gowanus Pkwy)

**HUNTS POINT MARKET TRUCK TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Market Loop to Hunts Point Ave. to Randall Ave. to Leggett Ave. to
Bruckner Blvd EB to

Triborough Bridg. Also, Leggett Ave. to Bruckner Blvd. WB to Major
Deegan Expressway (I-87)

Tiffany St. at Randall to Garrison Ave. to Barretto St. to Bruckner
Blvd. WB to Whitlock Ave.

Also, Tiffany St. to Bruckner EB to Bruckner Expressway

Halleck St to Edgwater Rd. to Bruckner Blvd EB to Bruckner Expressway.
Also, Garrison Ave. to

Hunts Point Ave. to Bruckner Expressway

**HOWLAND HOOK MARINE TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Entrance on Richmond Terrace to Western Ave. to Goethals Rd. to Forest
Ave. to Staten Island

Expressway

Entrance on Richmond Terrace to Western Ave. to Gulf Ave to Staten
Island expressway EB and

West Shore Expressway SB. Also Forest Ave at Gulf Ave. to N. Goehals Rd.
to Staten Island

**ALBANY COUNTY AIRPORT** Airport

Delasandro Dr. (Entrance to Albany Shaker Rd.), Albany-Shaker Rd.
(Delasandro to NY 7)

Delasandro dr. (Entrance to NY 155), NY 155 (delasandro Dr. to I-87)

**PORT OF ALBANY** Port

Church St. (Entrance to NY 32), NY 32 (Church to I-787 NB and Sb exits)

**CONRAIL - SELKIRK YARD** Truck/Rail

CR 53 (Entrance to CR 55), Cr 55 (Cr 53 to US 9W), US 9W (CR 55 to NY
396), NY 396 (US 9W

to Ny 144), NY 144 (NY 396 to I-87)

**PORT OF OSWEGO** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**SYRACUSE-HANCOCK AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Blvd. (Entrance to I-81)

**CONRAIL DEWITT YARD** Truck/Rail

Central Ave. (Entrance to Freemont), freemont Rd. (Central to
Kirkville), Kirkville Rd. (Freemont to

I-481)

Girden Rd. (Entrance to Kirkville Rd.), Kirkville (Girden to I-481)to

**ROCHESTER AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**BUFFALO AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF BUFFALO** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**Facility Type**

**NORFOLK-SOUTHERN TRANSFER STATION** Truck/Rail

Gruner Rd. (Entrance to Harlem), Harlem Rd. (Gruner to Walden), Walden
Rd. (Harlem to I-90)

**PORT OF OGDENSBURG** Port

Patterson St (Entrance to NY 37/812)

**SOUTH BROOKLYN RAILROAD YARD** Truck/Rail

39th St. (Rail Yard to Gowanus Pkwy)

**[North Carolina]{.underline}**

**PETROLEUM PIPELINE TERMINAL - CHARLOTTE** Truck/Pipeline

NC 27 between I-85 and SR 1784 (Mount Holly Rd)

**CSX FREIGHT INTERMODAL FACILITY - CHARLOTTE** Truck/Rail

Hovis Rd and NC 16 between I-85 and the Terminal Entrance

**CHARLOTTE/DOUGLAS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

End of SR 1490 to US 521

NC 160 (West Blvd) and Yorkmont Rd between US 521 and Airport entrance

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORP. - CHARLOTTE** Truck/Rail

N. Brevard St and Caldwell St/Parkwood Ave between I-277 and Terminal
Entrance

**STAR ENTERPRISE PIPELINE TERMINAL** Truck/Pipeline

Shaw Mill Rd and Murchinson between the Proposed Outer Loop and terminal
Entrance

**PIEDMONT TRIAD INT AIRPORT - GREENSBORO** Airport

SR 2085 between NC 68 and the Parking Lot Entrance

**PETROLEUM PIPELINE TERMINAL - GREESBORO** Truck/Pipeline

SR 1554 (Chimney Rock Rd) and SR 1008 between I-40 and Amoco Entrance on
SR 1008

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN CORP. - GREENSBORO** Truck/Rail

Terminal Entrance to Merrit Dr to NC 6 to Holden Rd to Meadowview Rd to
SR 4121(High Point

Rd) to I-40

**RALEIGH-DURHAM INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Aviation Pkwy from I-540 Northern Wake Expressway to Airport Entrance

**DIXIE PIPELINE CO. - APEX** Truck/Pipeline

Terminal Entrance to NC 55 to US 1

**NORFOLF SOUTHERN CORP. - WINSTON-SALEM** Truck/Rail

From I-40 Business, MLK Dr to US 311 to Williston Dr to Old Walkertown
Rd to Terminal

**NC STATE PORTS AT MOREHEAD CITY** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**NC STATE PORTS - WILMINGTON** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PETROLUM PIPELINE TERMINAL - SELMA** Truck/Pipeline

SR 1003 between US 70 and SR 1928

**[Ohio]{.underline}**

**TOLEDO-LUCAS COUNTY PORT AUTHORITY** Port

From I-280(exit 9): NE on Front St (CR 508), SE on Millard Ave, E on
Tiffin Ave to terminal

**PORT FACILITY #2, #3 - COAL, ORE DOCKS** Port

From I-280(exit 9): NE on Front St (CR 508), SE on Millard Ave, E on
Tiffin Ave to terminal

entrance (same as 1P)

**Facility Type**

**CONRAIL \"AIRLINE\" TRAILER/CONTAINER TERM** Truck/Rail

From U.S. 20 (Reynolds Rd): E on Hill Rd (CR 30) to terminal entrance at
Parkside Blvd (CR 521)

**CSX BULK INTERMODAL DISTRIBUTION SYSTEM** Truck/Rail

From I-75: east on Miami St (SR 65) to entrance on Oakdale Ave (CR 558)

**MID-STATES ELEVATOR RIVERFRONT FACILITY** Port

From I-75: east on Miami St (SR 65) to entrance on Oakdale Ave (CR 558).
(Same as 4R)

**MAJOR GRAIN/BULK MATERIALS TERMINAL OPS** Truck/Rail

From I-75: north on South St, southeasterly on Kuhlman St to entrance to
terminal

**MAUMEE RIVER PORT FACILITY** Port

From I-75: north on South St, southeasterly on Kuhlman St to entrance to
terminal (same as 6R)

**TOLEDO EXPRESS AIRPORT - BURLINGTON AIR** Airport

From I-80/90: SW on SR 2, S and E on U.S. 20A/SR 295, N on Air Cargo
Parkway, to airport

**TRIPLE CROWN RAIL TRANSFER FACILITY** Truck/Rail

From U.S. 30 (on new location): north on SR 598 to Triple Crown Access
Drive

**NORFOLK AND SOUTHERN COAL DOCKS** Port

From US 6: Mills St to Monroe St to Coal Docks (Mileage included with
13P)

**SANDUSKY SAND & GRAVEL CO.** Port

From SR 2: SR 101 NE to US 6, US 6 NE to McDonough St., McDonough St N
to facility

**PORT OF HURON** Port

From SR 2: N on SR 13, E on U.S. 6, N on Tiffin, W on Temper, N on
Meeker, W on Berlin to Port

**PINNEY DOCK AND TRANSPORT COMPANY** Port

From I-90: north on SR 11, West on SR 531, N on Parkgate Ave to terminal

**STARK INTERMODAL FREIGHT FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**NORFOLK SOUTHERN DISCOVERY PARK** Truck/Rail

From I-270: North on Alum Creek Dr, NW on New World Road, W on Watkins
Rd to terminal

**RICKENBACKER AIRPORT** Airport

From I-270: South on Alum Creek Dr (CR 122) to airport at Fred Haise
Avenue

**COLUMBUS CONRAIL (BUCKEYE YARD)** Truck/Rail

From I-270: W on Roberts Rd, S on Westbelt Dr to Rail Yard at Trabue Rd

**MARYSVILLE CONRAIL** Truck/Rail

From U.S. 33: west on Honda Parkway to SR 739 (Stokes Rd), SR 739 (Honda
Pkwy to railyard

entrance (at intersection with SR 739)

**PIPELINE FUEL TERMINALS** Truck/Pipeline

From SR 202: southeasterly on Stanley Ave (CR 601), northerly on SR 201
to Shell Terminal

From SR 4: northweaterly on Stanely Ave (CR 601) to connector #1 at SR
201

**DAYTON INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

From Airport Access Rd: West on U.S. 40, north on Dog Leg Pike, east on
Old Springfield Rd

**WILMINGTON AIRPORT - AIRBORNE EXPRESS** Airport

From I-71 (exit 50): S on U.S. 68, E on U.S. 22 (& W US22DA), S on SR
73, W on Airport Rd to

**TEXAS EASTERN & MANHATTAN PETRO PIPELINE** Truck/Pipeline

From I-75 (exit 32): 6 miles east on SR 122 to facility entrance

From 1-71 (exit 45): west on SR 73, south on U.S. 42, west on SR 122 to
facility entrance

**Facility Type**

**11 INTERMODAL BARGE FAC. ALONG U.S. 50** Port

From I-75: West on U.S. 50 along Ohio River to Indiana Border (serves 11
ports along the

**CINCINNATI NORFOLK SOUTHERN (UNION STA)** Truck/Rail

From I-75: S on Freeman Ave, W on W. Eighth St to terminal entrance

**CINCINNATI CSXT (QUEENSGATE)** Truck/Rail

From I-75: W on Gest St, N on Dalton St, W on Findlay St to Terminal
Entrance

**WATERLOO COAL COMPANY** Port

From U.S. 52: SW on SR 522, NW on CR 527 to terminal entrance

**ST. JO MARINE, INC.-OHIO RIV SAND&GRAVEL** Port

From SR 7: east on 54th St, north on N. Guernsey St. to port

**RAYLE RIVER TERMINAL** Port

From SR 7: east on 54th St, south on N. Guernsey St. to port

**PORT OF FAIRPORT HARBOR- UNION SAND\'S** Port

From SR 44/2: NE on SR 2, NE on SR 283, NE on SR 535, NE on Fairport Rd,
N on Water St to

**PORT OF FAIRPORT HARBOR - GRAND RIVER** Port

Williams (Headlands to Olive), Headlands (Williams to SR 44), Olive
(Williams to SR 44)

**PORT OF LORAIN - USS/KOBE STEEL CO.** Port

E 28th St (SR 57 to Entrance)

**PORT OF LORAIN - AMCOR MARINE CORP.** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF LORAIN - JONICK DOCK & TERMINAL** Port

From SR 57: east and north on SR 611 to Bridge Drive

**PORT OF CLEVELAND - EAST BASIN** Port

From U.S. 20/U.S. 6/SR 2: North on E. 9th St, West on Erieside Avenue to
Port

From SR 2: West on SR 2 Marginal Roads, North on W. 3rd Street to Port

**PORT OF CLEVELAND - WEST BASIN** Port

From U.S. 6: N on W. 25th St, NE on Main Ave, NW on Elm St, N on River
Rd to Port Entrance

**PORT OF CLEVELAND -CUYAHOGA RIVER BERTHS** Port

From U.S. 422 (Broadway): SW on Lorain, southerly on Commercial Ave, SW
on W. 3rd St to port

**PORT OF CLEVELAND-BERTHS & RR/TRUCK TERM** Port

From I-490: south on W. 7th St, northeasterly on Quigley Ave,
northwesterly on W. 3rd St to port

**PORT OF CLEVELAND - MARATHON OIL CO.** Port

From I-77: south on E. 30th St (CR366), west on Pittsburgh Ave (SR14),
south on Broadway

**NORFOLK -SOUTHERN RR CONTAINER PORT** Truck/Rail

From I-90: easterly on U.S. 422 (Broadway) to facility entrance at E.
9th Street

**CLEVELAND HOPKINS INT\'L AIRPORT** Airport

From I-71 (exit 237): west on Snow Rd, south on Airport Freeway (SR 237)
to freight terminal

From Snow Road: North on Airport Freeway (SR 237) to passenger terminal

**CONRAIL INTERSTATE TERMINAL WAREHOUSE** Truck/Rail

Chatfield Ave (Warehouse Dr to W 105th St), W 105th St (Chatfirld to IR
71)

**CONRAIL INTERMODAL & FLEXI-FLO BULK TERM** Truck/Rail

E 152nd St (Entrance to I-90)

**Facility Type**

**MEDINA SUPPLY COMPANY & STONE YARD** Truck/Rail

From SR 18/57: south on State Road (CR 22), west on Smith Road (CR 4) to
facility entrance

**[Oklahoma]{.underline}**

**WILL ROGERS WORLD AIRPORT** Airport

Meridian Ave (Airport Rd to Terminal), Airport Rd (I-44 to Meridian Rd)

**WILLIAMS PIPELINE STATION** Truck/Pipeline

21st St (33rd W Ave to Burlington Northern RR at 23rd St)

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN RAILROAD** Truck/Rail

23st St (BN Terminal to Southwest Ave), SW Ave (23st St to I-244 Ramp)

**TULSA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CATOOSA** Port

SR 266 (Port to US 169)

**[Oregon]{.underline}**

**PORT OF ASTORIA** Port

Hamburg St, Industry St, Portway St between the Port and US 101

**PORT OF MORROW, BOARDMAN** Port

Boardman-Irrigon Rd (Ullman to Coyote Sta Rd), Ullman Blvd(Boardman to
Marine), Marine

Dr(Ullman to Ter 3 Access Rd), 084HC/ Laurel Rd (Boardman to I-84)

**PORT OF COOS BAY - OCEAN TERMINALS** Port

California Ave between Sherman Ave (US 101) and the Docks

Florida Ave, Sheridan Ave between Sherman Ave (US 101) and Sheridan Ave

**PORT OF COOS BAY - ISTHMUS SLOUGH** Port

Newport Ave, Mullen St between US 101 and the Nickle and Chip Terminals

**BROOKLYN YARD (SP), PORTLAND** Truck/Rail

Holgate Blvd between McLoughlin Blvd (or 99E) and AND SPRR Track

**PORTLAND INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Highway 30 (I-205 to 60th), 60 th St (Hwy 30 to Columbia), Columbia Blvd
(60th to MLK Blvd)

47th Ave (Columbia to Cornfoot), Cornfoot Rd (47th to Alderwood),
Alderwood (Cornfoot to

82nd), Airtrans Rd (Cornfoot to Air Freight Terminals)

82nd Ave (Hwy 30 to Airport Way)

Airport Way (I-205 to North Air Cargo)

**WILLRIDGE YARDS** Truck/Rail

Balboa Ave (Culebra to Yeon)

**NW INDUSTRIAL AREA** Truck/Pipeline

Front Ave (Kittridge to 61st), 61st St (Front to Culebra), Culebra Ave
(61st to Balboa)

**LAKE YARDS** Truck/Rail

Front Ave (Nicolai to Kittridge), Nocolai St (Yeon Ave to Front)

**ALBINA YARDS (UP), PORTLAND** Truck/Rail

Interstate Ave (Going to Russell), Russell St (Interstate Ave to the
Rail Facility), Going St (Basin

**PORT OF PORTLAND (TERMINAL 5)** Port

Port Access Rd between Lombard St and Terminal 5

**PORT OF PORTLAND (TERMINAL 6)** Port

N Pacific Gateway Blvd between N Marine Dr and Terminal 6

**Facility Type**

**PORT OF PORTLAND (TERMINAL 4)** Port

N Terminal Rd between Lombard St and Terminal 4

**EUGENE RELOAD FACILITIES, EUGENE** Truck/Rail

Garfield St (6th to Cross), Cross St (Garfield to Cleveland), Cleveland
St (Cross to Roosevelt),

Roosevelt Blvd (Cleveland SR 99)

**PORT OF COOS BAY - ROSEBURG TERMINALS** Port

Jordan Cove Rd (Private Rd to Transpacific), Transpacific Pkwy(Jordan
Cove to US 101)

**SWAN ISLAND SHIP REPAIR YARD** Port

Going St. (Basin St. to I-5)

**PORT OF PORTLAND (TERMINALS 1 AND 2)** Port

Port Access Rd. (Yeon St to Front Ave)

**[Pennsylvania]{.underline}**

**PITTSBURGH INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT-AIR CARGO** Airport

**TERMINAL**

From Facility N and S on Business Rt. 60 and Connects with US 60

**NEVILLE ISLAND GREIGHT CLUSTER** Port

Southeast on Neville Rd to PA 51

Nortwest on Neville Rd, West on Grand Ave to I-79

**CONRAIL DOUBLE STACK INTERMODAL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

SE on Wall Ave to PA 48 (SR 0048) North on PA 48 to I-376

**W ELIZABETH MONONGAHELA RIVER TERMINAL** Port

NE on New State Hwy (SR 0837) to PA 51 (SR 0051)

Southwest on New St Hwy & SR 0837 to SR 1006 to Future Mon/Fayette Expy

**DONORA INDUSTRIAL PARK TERMINAL** Port

SE on McKean Ave (SR 0837) to SR 1077 to SR 3013 to SR 0201 & Connects
to I-70

Southeast on McKean Ave & SR 0837 to Coyle Curtain Rd to Future M/F Expy

**ATLANTIC PIPELINE CO.** Truck/Pipeline

E on Mountain Home Rd (SR 3012) to Columbia Ave (SR 3016) or Woodrow Rd
& N to US 422

**PETROLEUM PRODUCTS CORP. TERMINAL** Truck/Pipeline

Burns Ave to SR 0764 to Interchange of US 22

**LUCKNOW YARD** Truck/Rail

S on Industrial Rd to Wilderwood Park Dr to Cameron St

North on Industrial Rd to Linglestown Rd (SR 0039) to US 22

**CONRAIL DB STACK FACILITY AND TRIPLE CROWN** Truck/Rail

W on Grayson Rd to Rupp Hill Rd to Paxton St to Penhar Dr to US 322

**HARRISBURG INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF ERIE** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**ALLENTOWN/BETHLEHEM PIGGY BACK YARD** Truck/Rail

E on River St to PA 378

**TIOGA PIPELINE FACILITIES** Truck/Pipeline

Bath St (Facility to I-95) and (Facility to Alleghany Ave to I-95)

**Facility Type**

**TIOGA PORT FACILITIES** Port

Delaware Ave to Castor Ave to I-95; Delaware Ave to Alleghany Ave to
I-95

**MORRISVILLE TRUCK/RAIL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

E Cabot Blvd to Oxford Valley Rd to US 1

**PHIL. BULK INTERMODAL DIST SERVICES TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

East on Moore St, South on 34th St to Maiden Ln to I-76

From I-76, Wharton St, South on Warfield St to Moore St

**S PHIL. PORT COMPLEX** Port

North on Old Delaware Ave to Columbus Blvd (same as S. Phil. Rail
Complex - 33R)

**S PHIL. RAIL COMPLEX** Truck/Rail

North on Old Delaware Ave to Columbus Blvd

**PHILADELPHIA INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT - FREIGHT** Airport

**FACILITY**

North on Scott Way, Northeast on Penrose Ave (SR 0291) to I-95 NB

North on Scotts Way, Northeast on Bartram Ave to I-95 SB

East on Hog Island Ave, North on Fort Mifflin Ave to Enterprise Ave to
I-95 NB

West Enterprise Ave to Island Ave to I-95 SB

**PENN. TERMINALS** Port

North on Salville Ave, East on Industrial Hwy (PA 291), North on Stewart
Ave (SR 2033) to I-95

**TWIN OAKS TRUCK/RAIL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Bethel Rd to US 322 (Conchester Rd)

**[Puerto Rico]{.underline}**

**RAFAEL HERNANDEZ AIRPORT, AGUADILLA** Airport

From PR-2 (km 124.5): North 2.9 miles on PR-107 to Old Ramey Air Force
Base

From PR-2: NW 5.8 mi on PR-110 to Old Ramey AFB

**PONCE PORT, PONCE** Port

From PR-52 (km 104.9): South 1.1 miles on PR-14 to port

**FAJARDO PORT, FAJARDO** Port

From PR-3 (km 43.4): southeasterly 1.7 mi on PR-194 and easterly 0.4 mi
on Osvaldo Ave,

southeasterly 0.07 mi on PR-987, and easterly on PR-195 to port

**LUIS MUNOZ MARIN INTL AIRPORT, SAN JUAN** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**SAN JUAN PORT, SAN JUAN (SOUTH)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**SAN JUAN PORT, SAN JUAN (NORTH)** Port

From PR-25 going west on PR-1 to the port

**[Rhode Island]{.underline}**

**PORT OF PROVIDENCE** Port

From I-95: E on Thurbers Ave 0.1 mi, S on Allens Ave 1.7 mi, E on Ernest
St 0.3 mi to terminal

**TF GREEN STATE AIRPORT, WARWICK** Airport

From I-95 (ex 13): easterly 1.6 mi on Airport Connector to Passenger
Terminal

**QUONSET POINT/DAVISVILLE INDUSTRIAL PK.** Port

From RI 4: SE 2.65 mi on RI 403 to Post Rd (US 1)

**[South Carolina]{.underline}**

**Facility Type**

**GREENVILLE-SPARTANBURG REGIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Gateway Dr (Terminal to I-85

**COLUMBIA METROPOLITAN AIRPORT** Airport

S-378 from SC 302 to S-32-1500

**CHARLESTON RAIL FACILITY (CSX)** Truck/Rail

S-62 (Montague Ave), S-1411 (Blossom St) between I-26 and the Rail
Freight Yard

**NORTH CHARLESTON RAIL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

**(NORFOLK-SOUTHERN)**

W Montague (I-26 to Marriott), Marriott Dr (Montague to Freight Yard)

**NORTH CHARLESTON TERMINAL** Port

Remount Rd (Terminal to I-26)

**WANDO TERMINAL** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**COLUMBUS ST/UNION PIER TERMINAL** Port

East Bay Street South to Charlotte Street, East to Washington St., South
to the Port

**PORT OF GEORGETOWN** Port

SC 106 (US 17 to Dock St), SC 103 (US 17 to SC 106) - see map in
connector file)

**[South Dakota]{.underline}**

**FREMAR FARMERS CO-OP GRAIN ELEVATOR, MARION** Truck/Rail

SD 44, FAS 6355 from US 81 to Marion

**HUTTING ELEVATOR CO. GRAIN ELEVATOR, CANTON** Truck/Rail

US 18 from I-29 to Canton

**JOE FOSS FIELD , SIOUX FALLS** Airport

Cliff Ave, Benson Rd, Minnesota Ave from I-90 to the Airport Entrance

Russell St (Minnesota Ave at the Airport Entrance to I-29)

**[Tennessee]{.underline}**

**COLONIAL PIPELINE - CHATANOOGA** Truck/Pipeline

Jersey Pike from Enterprise Park Dr. to SR-153

**MID SOUTH TERMINALS** Port

Hudson Rd. to Pineville Rd. to Moccasin Bend Rd. to Hamm Rd. to S. R. 29

**J.I.T. TERMINALS - CHATTANOOGA** Port

Manufactures Rd from SR-29 to Terminal Entrance

**VULCAN MATERIALS CO. - CHATTANOOGA** Port

River St from Evans St to Riverfront Pkwy (SR-58)

**SOUTHERN FOUNDARY SUPPLY - CHATTANOOGA** Port

W 19th St from Riverfront Pkwy (SR-58) to the Port Entrance

**CSX CORPORATION - KINGSPORT** Truck/Rail

Lincoln St from John B Dennis Hwy (SR-93) to Facility Entrance

**COLOIAL & PLANTATION PIPELINE CO. - KNOXVILLE** Truck/Pipeline

Middlebrook Pike (SR-169), 44th St, Western Ave from the Terminal
Entrance to I-75

**Facility Type**

**FORREST YARDS - MEMPHIS NORFOLK SOUTHERN** Truck/Rail

Southern Ave from Lamar Ave (SR-4) to E Parkway (SR-277)

E Parkway (SR-277) from Lamar Ave (SR-4) to Southern Ave

Spottswood Ave from Airways (SR-277) to Forrest Yard

**PRESIDENT\'S ISLAND - MEMPHIS** Port

McLemore Ave, Riverside Blvd, Jack Capley Causeway, Harbor Ave, Channel
Ave, Jetty St

Between I-55 & Port

**MEMPHIS INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Tchulahoma and Democrat Rd between Lamar AVE (SR-4) and Airways Blvd

Plough Blvd between I-240 and the Airport Entrance

**LEEWOOD YARDS** Truck/Rail

Jackson Ave (SR-14) and Chelsea Ave between I-40 and Warford St

**TENNESSEE YARDS - MEMPHIS BURLINGTON NOR** Truck/Rail

Shelby Dr between Lamar Ave (SR-4) and the Tennessee Yard

**JOHNSTON YARDS - MEMPHIS ILLINOIS CENTER** Truck/Rail

Mallory Ave and Riverport Rd between I-55 and Rail Yard

**RADNOR YARDS - NASHVILLE CSX** Truck/Rail

Armory Ave and Sidco Dr between I-65 and Harding Place

**[Texas]{.underline}**

**DIAMOND SHAMROCK/PHILLIPS (AMARILLO)** Truck/Pipeline

Loop 335 and Western St between the Plant and I-40

**ROBERT MUELLER MUNICIPAL AIRPORT (AUSTIN)** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #1** Port

Upriver Rd (IH-37 to the Citgo Plant)

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #2** Port

Corn Products Rd (IH-37 to the Terminal at Valero)

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #3** Port

Navigation Blvd between IH-37 and the Corpus Christi Public Elevator
Terminal

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #4** Port

Buddy Lawrence between IH-37 and the Termini at American Chrome and
Chemical

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #5** Port

Port Ave between IH-37 and the Termini at Corpus Christi Public Compress

**LAREDO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Bartlett St (US 59 to Maher), Maher Ave (Bartlett to Pappas)

Airpark Dr (facility to US 59) - proposed

Airport Access Rd (Terminal to Loop 20)

**PORT OF LAREDO (UNION PACIFIC RR)** Truck/Rail

I-35 Frontage Rd between Milo (LP 20) Exit Ramp and the Facility Access
Rd (Private)

I-35 Frontage Rd between Unitech Interchange and the Facility Access Rd
(Private)

**MCALLEN EC DEV. CORP. & FOREIGN TRADE ZONE** Truck/Rail

FM 1016 (Ware Rd to Spur 115)

**PORT OF BROWNSVILLE** Port

SH 48 (Gate at the Fishing Harbor to FM 511)

**Facility Type**

**BROWNSVILLE S PADRE ISLAND INTERNATIONAL** Airport

Billy Mitchell Blvd (FM 2519) (Airport Terminal to Boca Chica Blvd (SH
4))

**PORT OF HARLINGEN** Port

FM 106 (Port to Loop 499)

**SAN ANTONIO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Blvd between the Airport Terminal and I-410

**SOUTHER PACIFIC (SAN ANTONIO)** Truck/Rail

Sherman St and Pine St between the Terminal and I-35

**DIAMOND SHAMROCK TERMINAL (SAN ANTONIO)** Truck/Pipeline

US 281 between the Terminal Entrance and I-410

**KOCH REFINING COMPANY (SAN ANTONIO)** Truck/Pipeline

Pop Gunn between Houston and the Terminal Entrance

**COASTAL STATES TERMINAL (SAN ANTONIO)** Truck/Pipeline

Corner Pwy between I-410 and the Terminal Entrance

**EL PASO INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Terminal Dr between the Airport and Airway Blvd

**SANTA FE RAILROAD YARD (EL PASO)** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**SOUTHERN PACIFIC RR ALFALFA YARD (EL PASO)** Truck/Rail

Dodge Rd between the Railroad yard and North Loop Dr

**CHEVRON REFINERY (EL PASO)** Truck/Pipeline

Trowbridge Dr between I-10 and North Loop Dr

**TURNING BASIN TERMINAL (S HOUSTON)** Port

75th St between Navigation Blvd and the Terminal

**BAYPORT TERMINAL (HOUSTON)** Port

Port Rd between SH 146 and the Terminal

**JACINTOPORT TERMINAL (HOUSTON)** Port

Jacintoport Blvd between Beltway 8 and the Terminal

South Sheldon Rd between I-10 and the Terminal

**MANCHESTER TERMINAL CORP. (HOUSTON)** Port

Manchester between East Loop 610 and the Terminal

**PORT OF TEXAS CITY** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**S.P. HOUSTON INTERMODAL HUB** Truck/Rail

Lockwood between the Terminal and I-10

**U.P. SETTEGAST YARD (HOUSTON)** Truck/Rail

Kirkpatrick Blvd between the Terminal and I-610

**M.P. GMAC YARD** Truck/Rail

Hardy Rd between the Terminal and FM-1960 (Hiumble Westfield Rd)

**HOUSTON INTERCONTINENTAL AIRPORT** Airport

No Connection Necessary

**ELLINGTON FIELD (HOUSTON)** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**Facility Type**

**BARBOURS CUT CONTAINER TERMINAL** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**BRAZOSPORT TURNING BASIN (FREEPORT)** Port

FM-1495 between SH 288 and the Terminal

**PORT OF GALVESTON** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**TURNING BASIN TERMINAL (HOUSTON)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF CORPUS CHRISTI #6** Port

Navigation Blvd between IH 37 and the Corpus Christi Public Elevator
Terminal (Same as 14P-#3)

**GATX TERMINALS CORP.** Truck/Pipeline

Jefferson (Facility to SR 225)

**PHILLIPS PIPELINE CO.** Truck/Pipeline

Jefferson (Facility to SR 225)\... (Same as 103L GATX Terminal Corp.)

**STAR ENTERPRISE/TEXACO** Truck/Pipeline

Liberty between the Terminal and US 59

**A.T.S.F. INTERMODAL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**S.P. BARBOURS CUT INTERMODAL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**DFW INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

International Pkwy (No Connection Necessary)

**DIAMOND SHAMROCK CORP. BULK FUELFACILITY (DFW)** Truck/Pipeline

Brumlow Ave between the Facility and SH 26 (Colleyville Blvd)

**EXXON BULK FUEL FACILITY (DFW)** Truck/Pipeline

Carl Rd (Facility to SH 183 (Airport Freeway))

**UNION PACIFIC INTERMODAL FACILITY (DFW)** Truck/Rail

Sam Houston (Forney to UPRR), Forney Rd(Town East to Terminal), Forney
Rd (US 80 to Town

East), South Parkway (US 80 to Forney)

**SANATA FE RAILWAY INTERMODAL FACILITY (DFW)** Truck/Rail

Keller Haslet Rd between the Facility and I-35

**UNION PACIFIC INTERMODAL CENTER (ARLINGTON)** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF PORT ARTHUR** Port

Houston Ave (SR 87 and the Port)

**DEERPARK CLUSTER** Truck/Pipeline

Crosby/Lynchburg Rd (Terminal to I-10)

**GALENA PARK CLUSTER** Truck/Pipeline

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**JACINTOPORT CLUSTER** Truck/Pipeline

Jacintoport Blvd between Beltway 8 and the Terminal (Same as Jacintoport
Terminal - 57P)

S Sheldon Rd between I-10 and the Terminal (Same asJacintoport
Terminal - 57P)

**Facility Type**

**ALAMEDA CLUSTER** Truck/Pipeline

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF BEAUMONT** Port

US 90 (I-10 to Calder), Calder (US 90 to Main), Main (Calder to Port) -
prevoiusly approved but

connector not identified

**[Utah]{.underline}**

**SALT LAKE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Terminal to Route 2370 to SR 154 to I-80

**SHARP TRUCK/RAIL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Terminal to SR 78 to SR 28

**BECK STREET TRUCK/RAIL FACILITY** Truck/Rail

Terminal to SR 89 to SR 268 to I-15

**CHEVRON OIL REFINERY** Truck/Pipeline

2400 North to on/off Ramp of I-15

**AMOCO OIL REFINERY** Truck/Pipeline

900 North to 400 West to SR 89 to SR 268 to I-15

**[Vermont]{.underline}**

**VERMONT RAILWAY YARD, BURLINGTON** Truck/Rail

Battery St, Main St, US 2 between the Rail Yard and I-89

Proposed Southern Connector between the Rail Yard and I-89

**[Virginia]{.underline}**

**NORFOLK INTL. AIRPORT** Airport

Norview Ave. (Entrance to I-64)

**RICHMOND INTL. AIRPORT** Airport

Fox Rd.(Entrance to Airport Dr.), Airport Dr (Fox to Rt. 60), Rt.156
(Rt60 to I-64)

**ROANOKE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT** Airport

Aviation Rd. (Entrance to Rt 101)

**DULLES INTL. AIRPORT** Airport

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF HAMPTON RDS - LAMBERTS POINT** Port

Orapax Rd. (Entrance to Raleigh Ave.), Raleigh Ave (Orapax to S.R. 337)

**PORT OF HAMPTON - NEWPORT NEWS TERMINAL** Port

25th St. (Entrance to Huntington), Huntington Ave (25th to 26th), 26th
Str. (Huntington to I-664)

25th St. (Entrance to Huntington), Huntington (25th to 23rd), 23rd
(Huntington to I-664)

**PORT OF HAMPTON RDS - NORFOLK INTL TERM.** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF HAMPTON RDS.- PORTSMOUTH TERM.** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF RICHMOND - DEEPWATER TERM.** Port

Deep Water Rd. (Ent. to Connector), Connector Rd. (DW Rd. to Comm.),
Commerce Rd (Conn. Rd to

I-95)

**ALEXANDRIA INTERMODAL - NORFOLK SOUTHERN** Truck/Rail

Metro Rd (Entrance to Van Dorn St.), Van Dorn St. (Metro Rd to I-95).

**Facility Type**

**CHESAPEAKE INTERMODAL - NORFOLK SOUTHERN** Truck/Rail

Atlantic Ave. (Entrance to S.R.168), S.R. 168 (Atlantic to I-64)

**VIRGINIA INLAND PORT** Truck/Rail

Rt. 340 (Entrance to I-66)

**[Washington]{.underline}**

**SPOKANE INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

Airport Dr (U.S. 2 to Airport)

**UNION PACIFIC ARGO YARD, SEATTLE** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF VANCOUVER** Port

SR 501 (I-5 to Port)

**PORT OF KALAMA** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF LONGVIEW** Port

SR 432 (SR 4 to I-5), SR 433 (SR 432 to Port)

**PORT OF OLYMPIA** Port

From I-5: Via Henderson Blvd. and Plum Street to Port Entrance at State
Street

**PORT OF PORT ANGELES** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF ANACORTES** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF BELLINGHAM** Port

From I-5: Southerly on Meridian St, Squallicum Way, Roeder Ave.,
Chestnut St and Cornwall Ave

**BURLINGTON NORTHERN INTERBAY YD, SEATTLE** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**BN-UP PORT OF TACOMA YARDS** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**BN-SIG YARD (SEATTLE INTL GATEWAY)** Truck/Rail

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**PORT OF EVERETT** Port

W Marine View Dr. (Port to Pacific), Everett Av. (Marine View to I-5S)
and Maple St ramps to I-5N

**ELLIOT BAY-FLORIDA ST. PORT (SEATTLE)** Port

11th Ave (Spokane St to Port), SW Spokane St (Chelan to E Marginal Way)

**SEA-TAC INTERNATIONAL AIRPORT** Airport

No Additional Connector Needed - Direct Access from Airport Access Road
off of SR 518

**PORT OF TACOMA** Port

Port of Tacoma Rd (I-5 to E 11th St)

**ELLIOT BAY-ALASKAN WAY PORT (SEATTLE)** Port

Served by an Existing NHS Route

**BN-SOUTH SEATTLE YARD** Truck/Rail

From Boeing Access Rd (just off I-5): North on Airport Way S to Facility
Entrance at Hardy Street

**BN - YARDLEY (SPOKANE)** Truck/Rail

No Additional Connector Needed - Direct Access from Fancher Road

**Facility Type**

**[West Virginia]{.underline}**

**CLUSTER OF DOWNTOWN HUNTINGTON PORTS** Port

Bridge to Ohio(OH State line to US-60EB), US-60EB(WV-527 to 8th), WV-527
(US-60EB to

WV-152), WV-527NB (US-60EB to WV-527), WV-152 (1-64 to WV-527)

**CLUSTER OF PORTS E OF HUNTINGTON ON OHIO** Port

From I-64 (ex 15): W and N 3.6 mi on U.S. 60, E 6.0 mi on WV 2 to port

**[Wisconsin]{.underline}**

**GENERAL MITCHELL AIRPORT, MILWAUKEE** Airport

Mitchell Field Main Access Rd. between Howell Av. (SR 38) and Terminal -
Ext. of NHS Route

**PORT OF SUPERIOR #1** Port

Dock St, N 1st St, Tower Ave between SR 35 and the Facility

**PORT OF SUPERIOR #2** Port

Main St, N 5th St between US 53 and the Facility

**PORT OF SUPERIOR #3** Port

Winter St, Susquhanna Ave, Belknap St between US 2 and the Facility

**PORT OF MILWAUKEE #1** Port

Lincoln Memorial Dr between Carferry Dr and E Scott St

Carferry Dr between Lincoln Memorial Dr and the Dead End

Bay St between Lincoln Memorial Dr and Carferry Dr

**PORT OF MILWAUKEE #2** Port

Harbor Dr between Bay St and E Scott Dr

E Scott Dr between Lincoln Memorial Dr and Harbor Dr

**PORT OF MILWAUKEE #3** Port

Becher St between S 5th St and E Bay St

E Bay St between Becher Ave and S Lenox St

E Lincoln Viaduct between S Lenox St and Lincoln Memorial Dr

**PORT OF GREEN BAY #1** Port

Hurlbut St, Bylsby Ave and Atkinson Dr. between I-43 and the Port
Facility

**PORT OF GREEN BAY #2** Port

Bylsby Ave, Prairie Ave, Broadway Ave, Alexander Ave, Alexander St,
Mather St, James St,

McDonald St between I-43 & Port Facility

**PORT OF GREEN BAY #3** Port

Broadway Av, State St, 7th St, Motor St, 9th St, Lombardi Ave, Ashland
Ave between SR 172 and

the Port Facility

**PORT OF OPERATORS OF LACROSSE #1** Port

Front St between Cass St and the Port Facility

King St between Front St and 3rd St (US 53)

**PORT OPERATORS OF LACROSSE #2** Port

Clinton St, Bainbridge St between Rose Ave and the Port Facility

**PORT OPERATORS OF PRAIRE DU CHIEN #1** Port

Main St and Blackhawk Ave between US 18 and the Port Facility

**PORT OF OPERATORS OF PRAIRE DU CHIEN #2** Port

Main St, Blackhawk Ave, Villa Louis St between US 18 and the Port
Facility - Ext. of Connection

to Prairie Du Chien #1

**Facility Type**

**TRUCK/RAIL FACILITY, MILWAUKEE** Truck/Rail

Lincoln Memorial Dr between Carferry Dr and E Scott St. (same as 8P)

Carferry Dr between Lincoln Memorial Dr and the Dead End. (same as 8P)

Bay St between Lincoln Memorial Dr and Carferry Dr. (same as 8P)

**GREEN BAY INTERMODAL TERMINAL** Truck/Rail

Hurlbut St, Bylsby Ave and Atkinson Dr. between I-43 and the Port
Facility. (Same as Port of

Green Bay - 11P)

> **[INTERMODAL CONNECTORS CONDITION & INVESTMENT STUDY]{.underline}**

**[FIELD INVENTORY DATA CHECKLIST]{.underline}**

Terminal Name:

City: Connector Length:

Connector(s) Description:

**PART I**

**HPMS Universe Data From HPMS National Database**

**Item 9.** Rural/Urban Designation \_\_\_

1\. Rural; 2. Small Urban (5 to 49k); 3. Urbanized (50 to 200k); 4.
Urbanized (\>200k)

**Item 12.** Functional System Code \_\_\_, \_\_\_,\_\_\_ (If more than
one, list all that apply)

> [RURAL]{.underline} [URBAN]{.underline}
>
> 01 Principal Arterial 11 Principal Arterial - Interstate
>
> 02 Principal Arterial - Other 12 Principal Arterial
> -Freeway/Expressway
>
> 06 Minor Arterial 14 Principal Arterial - Other
>
> 07 Major Collector 16 Minor Arterial
>
> 08 Minor Collector 17 Collector
>
> 09 Local 19 Local

**Item 20.** Governmental Ownership \_\_\_, \_\_\_,\_\_\_ (If more than
one, list all that apply)

> 01 State Highway 25 Other Local Agency
>
> 02 County Highway 26 Private (open to public)
>
> 03 Town or Township Highway 31 State Toll Authority
>
> 04 Municipal Highway 32 Local Toll Authority
>
> 21 Other State Agency

**Item 28.** AADT(if available) \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**Item 30.** Number of Through Lanes \_\_\_

**Item 31.** Urban Location \_\_\_, \_\_\_, \_\_\_ (If more than one,
check all that apply)

> 1 Central Business District
>
> 2 High Density Business/Commercial Center
>
> 3 Low Density Commercial
>
> 3a Industrial, Manufacturing and Warehousing (not in HPMS)

4.  High Density Residential

> 5 Low Density Residential
>
> 7 Other

**Item 36.** Pavement condition rating (PSR) \_\_\_\_\_, (0-5.0)
(Reported in HPMS data)

**Planning Jurisdiction**

Name of planning agency with area wide planning responsibility over the
connector.

MPO\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Or State\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

(This information will be used to match with Part IV information.)

**Bridge/Structure Identification**

Please report bridge/structure ID=s (up to 15 digits) and whether **on**
or **over** connector.

> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_
>
> ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> On\_\_\_\_ Over\_\_\_\_

**Railroad Crossing Numbers**

Please report the 6-digit, 1-letter \"U.S. DOT/AAR National Rail-Highway
Crossing Inventory Number\" for all active crossings on the connector.
It will be posted at the crossing.

> 1\. ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_ 2. ID
> #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_
>
> 3\. ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_ 4. ID
> #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_
>
> 5\. ID #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_ 6. ID
> #\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ \_\_\_\_

**[INTERMODAL CONNECTORS CONDITION & INVESTMENT STUDY]{.underline}**

**[FIELD INVENTORY DATA CHECKLIST]{.underline}**

Terminal Name:

City: Connector Length:

Connector(s) Description:

**PART II**

**Connector Condition Information**

**A. Geometric and Physical Features**

> **A1.** What is the condition of the pavement on the connector? (i.e.
> observed on field inspection.)

  ------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------------
  5\. Very good 4\. Good    3\. Fair        2\. Poor        1\. Very poor

  ------------- ----------- --------------- --------------- ---------------

If the condition is not uniform over the entire connector length, please
indicate the percentage of roadway in each category:

5.\_\_\_\_\_% 4.\_\_\_\_% 3.\_\_\_\_\_% 2.\_\_\_\_\_% 1.\_\_\_\_\_%

Use the following guide in answering Q A1:

  --------- -------------------------------------------------------------
  Very good Newly built or resurfaced and distress free.

  Good      Smooth Surface with little to no cracking or rutting.

  Fair      Serviceable with shallow rutting and moderate cracks
            beginning to occur, but does not affect travel speed on the
            connector.

  Poor      Same problems as fair but worse, causing some reduction in
            speed.

  Very poor Major problems with potholes etc., causing substantial
            reductions in speed.
  --------- -------------------------------------------------------------

> **A2.** Which of the following geometric or physical features are a
> problem on the connector? Check all that apply.

  ----- ----------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------
        **Geometric/Physical Problem**                  **Short     **Most of
                                                        Section**   Length**

  a\.   Inadequate Travelway Width                                  

  b\.   Inadequate Shoulder Width                                   

  c\.   Lack of Stabilized Shoulders                                

  d\.   Tight Turning Radii at Intersections                        

  e\.   Road Not Paved                                              

  f\.   Bridge/Overpass Vertical Clearance                          

  g\.   Weight Limitation Road/Bridge                               

  h\.   Narrow Bridge/Tunnel                                        

  i\.   Rough Abandoned Railroad Crossing                           

  j\.   Drainage/Flooding                                           

  k\.   Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_               
  ----- ----------------------------------------------- ----------- ----------

> **A3.** If any of the factors checked or \"other\" in question A2 need
> explanation, please provide it here (continue on back of page if
> necessary):
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**B. At-Grade Railroad Crossings**

> **B1.** How many at-grade railroad crossings are there along the
> connector?\_\_\_\_
>
> (If 0, go to C1)
>
> **B2.** Are at-grade railroad crossings a problem?
>
> \_\_\_Yes
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to C1)
>
> **B3.** Why are railroad crossings a problem? Check all that apply for
> each set of tracks.

  ----- ----------------------------------------------- -------- -------- --------
        **Crossing Problem**                            **#1**   **#2**   **#3**

  a\.   Delays at Railroad Crossing                                       

  b\.   Switching/Make-up Operations                                      

  c\.   Crossing Warning Devices                                          

  d\.   Inadequate Sight Distance at Crossing                             

  e\.   Rough Railroad Crossing Surface                                   

  f\.   Vehicle Underclearance (Humped Crossing)                          

  g\.   Lack of Alternate Route                                           

  h\.   Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                     
  ----- ----------------------------------------------- -------- -------- --------

> B4. If any of the factors checked in question B3 need explanation,
> please provide it here (continue on other side of page if necessary):
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**C. Traffic Operations and Safety**

> **C1.** Are there safety problems or delays **[on the
> connector]{.underline}** (excluding delays associated with railroad
> crossings)?
>
> \_\_\_Yes
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to C4)
>
> **C2.** Why and when does delay occur **[on the
> connector]{.underline}**? Check all that apply.

  ----------------------------------------------- --------- ------- ------------ --------
  **Traffic Operations/Safety Problem**           **AM/PM           **Terminal   
                                                  Peak**            Peak**       

  Heavy Traffic/Congested                         a\.               b\.          

  Long Delays at Traffic Signals                  c\.               d\.          

  Difficulty Making Left or Right Turns           e\.               f\.          

  Lack of Turning Lanes at Intersections          g\.               h\.          

  Lack of Traffic Signals                         i\.               j\.          

  Truck Queues at Gates                           k\.               l\.          

  Frequent Accidents                              m\.               n\.          

  On-Street Parking Conflicts                     o\.               p\.          

  Moveable Span Bridge Openings                   q\.               r\.          

  Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_                                  
  ----------------------------------------------- --------- ------- ------------ --------

> **C3.** Does the terminal peak occur during the AM/PM peak? Yes\_\_\_,
> No\_\_\_.
>
> **C4.** If any of the factors checked in question C2 need explanation,
> please provide it here (continue on other side of page if necessary):
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **C5.** Is delay a problem at the [connector=s junction with the
> mainline NHS route]{.underline}?
>
> \_\_\_Yes \_\_\_No (if No, go to D1)
>
> **C6.** Why and when does delay occur [at the connector/NHS
> junction]{.underline}? Check all that apply.

  ----------------------------------------------- ------- ------- ---------- -------
  **At the Connector Intersection**               AM/PM           Terminal   
                                                  Peak            Peak       

  Heavy Traffic on Mainline NHS                   a\.             b\.        

  Lack of Merge Area on to Mainline               c\.             d\.        

  Lack of Traffic Signals                         e\.             f\.        

  Poorly Designed Ramps                           g\.             h\.        

  Tight Turning Radii at Intersections            i\.             j\.        

  Lack of Turning Lanes                           k\.             l\.        

  Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   m\.             n\.        
  ----------------------------------------------- ------- ------- ---------- -------

> **C7.** If any of the factors checked in question C6 need explanation,
> please explain:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**D. Other Factors**

> **D1.** Is destination signing adequate for truck drivers to find the
> freight terminal?
>
> Yes\_\_\_, No\_\_\_ Comment?
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **D2.** If there are any other relevant factors not on this checklist
> which affect the efficiency, operation, and safety of this connector,
> please describe them here:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **D3.** Re-contact information. Whom can we call at the FHWA Division
> Office to clarify any of the information on this form?
>
> Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> Phone:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**[INTERMODAL CONNECTORS CONDITION & INVESTMENT STUDY]{.underline}**

**[FIELD INVENTORY DATA CHECKLIST]{.underline}**

Terminal Name:

City: Connector Length:

Connector(s) Description:

**PART III**

**Investment Information**

**E.** **Past Investment on Connectors**

> **E1.** Have any improvements been made to the connector [since
> November 1995]{.underline}?
>
> \_\_\_Yes (check column below)
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to F1)
>
> **E2.** What types of improvements have been made? Check all that
> apply.

**F. Programmed Investment**

**F1.** Are any improvements [programmed]{.underline} for the connector
in the next 3 years?

> \_\_\_Yes (check column below)
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to G1)

**F2.** What types of improvements are programmed? Check all that apply

  ------ -------- ----------------------------------------------- ----- --------
  a\.             New construction                                a\.   

  b\.             Reconstruction                                  b\.   

  c\.             Widening                                        c\.   

  d\.             Pavement Overlay                                d\.   

  e\.             Bridge Rehab/Construction                       e\.   

  f\.             Intersection Improvements                       f\.   

  g\.             Signage or Traffic Engineering                  g\.   

  h\.             Railroad Crossing Improvements                  h\.   

  i\.             Railroad Grade Separation                       i\.   

  j\.             Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   k\.   
  ------ -------- ----------------------------------------------- ----- --------

**E3.** What is the amount expended on improvements to the connector
[since November 1995?]{.underline}

**F3.** What is the estimated amount for programmed improvements for
connector in [next 3 years?]{.underline}

  ----- --------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----- ----------------
  a\.   \$              Federal                                         a\.   \$

  b\.   \$              State                                           b\.   \$

  c\.   \$              Local                                           c\.   \$

  d\.   \$              Private                                         d\.   \$

  e\.   \$              Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   e\.   \$

        \$              **Total**                                             \$
  ----- --------------- ----------------------------------------------- ----- ----------------

**G. Other Improvement Information**

> **G1.** Are any improvements planned beyond three years? \_\_\_No (if
> No, go to G2)
>
> \_\_\_Yes, Please
> Explain:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **G2.** Have there been any improvements not on the connector that
> have benefited terminal traffic and operations? \_\_\_No (if No, go to
> G3 )
>
> \_\_\_Yes, Please Explain:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **G3.** Re-contact information. Whom can we call to clarify the
> investment information on this form?
>
> Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> Phone:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

**[INTERMODAL CONNECTORS CONDITION & INVESTMENT STUDY]{.underline}**

**[FIELD INVENTORY DATA CHECKLIST]{.underline}**

**Part IV**

**Investment Processes**

**H. Improvement Identification** (**[Note]{.underline}**: This form is
to be completed only once for each governmental agency for connectors
within its planning jurisdiction.)

> **H1.** What unit of government has responsibility for area wide
> planning?
>
> Name of MPO\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_ Or State DOT
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H2.** Is there a systematic process in place for identifying freight
> needs in the area in which the connector is located?
>
> \_\_\_Yes
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to H7)
>
> **H3.** What mechanisms have been used by the unit of government
> identified in H1 to identify freight needs? Check all that apply.

  ------- ---------------------------------------------------- ----------
  a\.     Policy Board                                         

  b\.     Technical Advisory Committee                         

  c\.     Freight Advisory Committee                           

  d\.     State Freight Committee                              

  e\.     Chamber of Commerce                                  

  f\.     Management System(s)                                 

  g\.     Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_        
  ------- ---------------------------------------------------- ----------

> **H4.** If any of the factors checked in question H3 need explanation,
> please provide it here (continue on other side of page if necessary):
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H5.** Have these mechanisms been responsible for getting projects
> programmed on NHS connectors? \_\_\_No, (if No, go to H6)
>
> \_\_\_Yes, Please explain:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H6.** Have these mechanisms been responsible for getting other
> freight-related projects funded on other non-connector roads in the
> area? \_\_\_No, (if No, go to H7)
>
> \_\_\_Yes, Please explain:
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H7.** Have any identified (i.e., applied for) improvements to
> connectors gone unprogrammed in this area since 1991?
>
> \_\_\_Yes
>
> \_\_\_No (if No, go to H9)
>
> **H8.** What factors contributed to the needed improvements going
> unprogrammed? Check all that apply.

  ------ --------------------------------------------------------- ---------
  a\.    Low Priority in State/MPO Plans                           

  b\.    Environmental Concerns                                    

  c\.    Neighborhood/Community Opposition                         

  d\.    Physical/other Constraints                                

  e\.    Lack of Local Match/Sponsorship                           

  f\.    Lack of Private Sector Participation                      

  g\.    Other\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_   
  ------ --------------------------------------------------------- ---------

> **H9.** If any of the factors checked in question H8 need explanation,
> please provide it here (continue on other side of page if necessary):
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H10.** Are there any other relevant factors not covered which affect
> the ability to fund improvements on connectors?
> \_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> **H11.** Re-contact information. Whom can we call to clarify the
> investment information on this form?
>
> Name:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
> Phone:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_
>
> Organization:\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_\_

[^1]: FHWA, April 14, 1995 memorandum, *Guidelines for Identifying
    National Highway System Connectors to Major Intermodal Terminals*,
    HEP-10.

[^2]:
    > US Department of Transportation, *Performance Plan for Fiscal Year
    > 2000*, p. 2.

[^3]:
    > US Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration,
    > *1998 FHWA National Strategic Plan*, p. 3.

[^4]:
    > *National Conference on Setting an Intermodal Transportation
    > Research Framework*, Transportation Research Board, Conference
    > Proceedings 12, 1997.

[^5]:
    > *1998/1999 Boeing World Air Cargo Forecast*, p. 17.

[^6]:
    > S. Hansell, "Retailers Look Back and See Online Shopping Is
    > Gaining," *The New York Times*, December 24, 1999.

[^7]:
    > *New York Times*, [op. cit.]{.underline}.

[^8]:
    > Source: Chicago Area Transportation Study (CATS), Statistics for
    > 1998.

[^9]: AFunding and Institutional Options for Freight Infrastructure
    Improvements@ (KPMG for FHWA Office of Freight Management and
    Operations, May 2000).