INTEGRATED CORRIDOR 

MANAGEMENT AND 

FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES
NOTICE

This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the 

U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information 

exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use 

of the information contained in this document.’

The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. 

Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only 

because they are considered essential to the objective of the document.

QUALITY ASSURANCE STATEMENT

The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) provides high-quality 

information to serve Government, industry, and the public in a 

manner that promotes public understanding. Standards and policies 

are used to ensure and maximize the quality, objectivity, utility, and 

integrity of its information. FHWA periodically reviews quality

issues and adjusts its programs and processes to ensure continuous 

quality improvement.

Cover photo: Fotolia
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

Technical Report Documentation Page

1. Report No.

7. Author(s)

17. Key Words

19. Security Clasif. (of this report)

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) Reproduction of completed page authorized

20. Security Clasif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 21. Price

4. Title and Subtitle

15. Supplementary Notes

16. Abstract

9. Performing Organization Name and Address

12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address

5. Report Date

10. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

13. Type of Report and Period Covered

6. Performing Organization Code

11. Contract or Grant No.

14. Sponsoring Agency Code

8. Performing Organization Report No.

18. Distribution Statement

Integrated Corridor Management and Freight Opportunities

Robert Sheehan, Program Manager, Multimodal ITS Research and Deployment, ITS Joint Program Office 

The vision of integrated corridor management (ICM) is that transportation networks will realize significant improvements in 

the efficient movement of people and goods through integrated, proactive management of existing infrastructure along major 

corridors. Through an ICM approach, transportation professionals manage the corridor as a multimodal system and make 

operational decisions for the benefit of the corridor as a whole. This primer examines how freight can be incorporated into an 

ICM approach, as well as the benefits of ICM in addressing the freight challenge. It explores opportunities to effectively 

integrate freight institutionally, operationally, and technically, both by leveraging existing platforms and considering new 

options for coordination between traditional ICM and freight stakeholders. Lastly, although integrating freight stakeholders and 

ICM holds great promise for more efficient operations on both ends, it is not without challenges. This document will explore 

what these challenges are and how they can be overcome.

Leidos

11251 Roger Bacon Drive 

Reston, VA 20190

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Rebecca Brewster (ATRI), Anna Giragosian (Leidos), Diane Newton (Leidos)

Integrated corridor management, freight No restrictions.

Unclassified Unclassified 44 N/A

December 2015

DTFH61-12-D-00050

Technical Report

April 2014 - December 2015

HOTM-1

2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No.

ATRI

950 N. Glebe Road 

Arlington, VA 22203

FHWA-HOP-15-018

INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

iii

CONTENTS

Introduction...................................................................................................................................1

The Fundamentals of Integrated Corridor Management...........................................................2

Corridor-Level Focus..........................................................................................................2

Integration...........................................................................................................................3

Management........................................................................................................................3

Diverse Stakeholder Group .................................................................................................4

The Integrated Corridor Management Research Initiative.4

The Freight Challenge...............................................................................................................6

Benefits of Integration .................................................................................................................9

Opportunities for Integration....................................................................................................11

Institutional Integration...........................................................................................................12

Trucking............................................................................................................................12

Cargo Facilities and Customers .......................................................................................12

Opportunities for Institutional Integration........................................................................ 13

Challenges to Institutional Integration.............................................................................. 15

Operational Integration .......................................................................................................... 16

Opportunities for Operational Integration ....................................................................... 17

Cross-Town Improvement Project .................................................................................... 18

Freight Advanced Traveler Information System ..............................................................20

Challenges to Operational Integration .............................................................................26

Technical Integration...............................................................................................................27

Challenges to Technical Integration..................................................................................28

Opportunities for Technical Integration ...........................................................................29

Conclusion ...................................................................................................................................31

Appendix. State Trucking Association Websites .....................................................................33
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

iv

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Opportunities and challenges associated with integrated corridor management 

 and freight. ...................................................................................................................... 11

Table 2. Freight stakeholder goals and objectives. ........................................................................ 13

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Map. Example of different agencies and transportation networks on a corridor. ............2

Figure 2. Illustration. The active management process...................................................................3

Figure 3. Map. American Transportation Research Institute truck global positioning 

 system data.......................................................................................................................5

Figure 4. Map. Cost of congestion on a per-mile basis. ..................................................................6

Figure 5. Illustration. Benefits of integrating freight and integrated corridor management. ..........9

Figure 6. Diagram. Dynamic response plan selection process ..................................................... 16

Figure 7. Diagram. Overview of Kansas City Cross-Town Improvement Project components and 

 data sources.................................................................................................................... 19

Figure 8. Diagram. Architecture of the Dallas-Fort Worth Freight Advanced Traveler 

 Information System prototype. ......................................................................................22

Figure 9. Illustration. An eco-freight signal priority application. .................................................23

Figure 10. Photo. Variable message sign information display from Minnesota 

 SmartPark system. ........................................................................................................25

Figure 11. Photo. Low-hanging tree limbs create “unofficial” hazard on an alternate route. .......26

Figure 12. Photo. Overpass with height restrictions can impact alternate route availability. .......26

Figure 13. Diagram. Potential integrated corridor management system components...................28
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

v

ACRONYMS

ATRI American Transportation Research Institute 

C-TIP Cross-Town Improvement Project 

DFW Dallas-Fort Worth

DMA Dynamic Mobility Application

DOT department of transportation

DRG dynamic route guidance

DSS decision support system

FHWA Federal Highway Administration 

FPM Freight Performance Measures 

FRATIS Freight Advanced Traveler Information System

GHG greenhouse gas

GPS global positioning system 

HOS hours-of-service

ICM integrated corridor management

IMEX intermodal move exchange

ITS intelligent transportation systems

LTL less-than-truckload

MPO metropolitan planning organization 

OSAP Open Source Architecture Package 

ROI return on investment

RTTM real-time traffic monitoring 

SRI Smart Roadside Initiative 

STA State trucking association 

TL truckload

USDOT U.S. Department of Transportation 

WDU wireless drayage updating

INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1

INTRODUCTION

In today’s urban transportation corridors, each transportation agency within the corridor 

typically handles operations independently. While the operators may collaborate or interact to 

some extent to deal with incidents or pre-planned events, each agency conducts most day-to-day 

operations individually. As congestion and the number of incidents have increased, this method 

of operations has become less effective in meeting the transportation needs of the businesses and 

people that rely upon the corridor. 

The vision of integrated corridor management (ICM) is that transportation networks will realize 

significant improvements in the efficient movement of people and goods through the integrated, 

proactive management of existing infrastructure along major corridors. Through an ICM 

approach, transportation professionals manage the corridor as a multimodal system and make 

operational decisions for the benefit of the corridor as a whole.

Most ICM strategies to date have focused on improving 

passenger travel, and ICM stakeholders have included public 

transportation agencies, such as State and local departments 

of transportation (DOT), metropolitan planning 

organizations (MPO), and transit agencies. Yet our Nation’s 

busiest freight corridors run through urban areas that carry 

millions of commuters, leisure travelers, and goods on 

increasingly crowded roadways and transit systems. Freight 

also plays a critical role in our Nation’s economy. Adding 

definition to the relationship between ICM and freight will 

improve the integration of freight stakeholders, issues, and 

solutions into the ICM process.

This primer will examine how freight can be integrated into 

an ICM approach, as well as the benefits of ICM in 

addressing the freight challenge. It will explore 

opportunities to effectively integrate freight considerations 

into corridor management institutionally, operationally, and 

technically, both by leveraging existing platforms and 

considering new options for coordination between 

traditional ICM and freight stakeholders. Lastly, although 

integrating freight stakeholders and ICM holds great 

promise for more efficient operations on both ends, it is not 

without challenges. This document will explore these 

challenges and determine how they can be overcome.

Who should read this 

primer?

The intended audience for this 

primer includes stakeholders 

from State and local 

department of transportations, 

metropolitan planning 

organizations, transit agencies, 

and other agencies that may be 

involved in an integrated 

corridor management effort. 

Additionally, this primer is 

intended to inform freight 

stakeholders in major urban 

centers and along freight 

corridors of the benefits they 

can expect to achieve from 

greater integration with 

integrated corridor 

management (ICM). This 

includes freight interests in 

trucking, rail, maritime and air 

cargo, as well as freight 

distribution facilities and 

businesses that rely heavily on 

freight transportation. 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2

THE FUNDAMENTALS OF INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT

The ICM approach is based on several fundamental concepts: a corridor-level focus on 

operations; agency integration institutionally, operationally, and technical; and active 

management of corridor assets and facilities. In addition, ICM requires multi-agency, multimodal collaboration among a diverse group of stakeholders. Each of these concepts is described 

in more detail in the following sections. 

Corridor-Level Focus

One of the fundamental elements of ICM is that it is focused at the corridor level. From the 

perspective of the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) ICM Initiative, a corridor is a 

travel shed defined by existing and forecasted travel patterns of people and goods. A corridor 

serves a particular travel market or markets that are affected by similar transportation needs and 

mobility issues. It includes a combination of various “networks,” which denote a specific 

combination of facility type and mode. These networks provide similar or complementary 

transportation functions and may include freeways, limited access facilities, surface arterials, 

public transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities, among others. Additionally, a corridor 

includes cross-network connections that permit travelers to easily transfer between networks.

George Washington Memorial Parkway

123

123

123

236

7

7

7

28

28

28

657

657

28

236

236

WASHINGTON, D.C

THE WHITE 

HOUSE

THE ARLINGTON PENTAGON

VIENNA

RESTON

OAKTON

MCLEAN

TYSONS

HERNDON

CENTREVILLE

FAIRFAX

Freeway - State Department of 

Transportation

Toll Road -Toll Road Authority

Rail Line - Transit Agency

Arterials and Traffic Signal Systems - Local Jurisdictions

Bike/Ped System - Local Jurisdictions

Bus - Transit Agencies and Private Companies

Shared Use Mobility - Private Companies

FALLS CHURCH

286

286

286

286

267

1

1

29

29

29

29

50

50

50

50

295

395

395

495 495

495

495

66

66

66

495

495

Figure 1. Map. Example of different agencies and transportation networks on a corridor.

Source: Federal Highway Administration
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

3

Integration

Integration serves a bridging function between the various networks that make up a corridor; it 

involves processes and activities that facilitate more seamless operations. In order to implement 

ICM, the transportation networks within a corridor, and their respective intelligent transportation 

systems (ITS) and management systems, need to be integrated institutionally, operationally, and 

technically. 

These three dimensions of integration are closely related and interdependent. For example, 

technical integration can facilitate more effective operational integration, and the integration of 

ongoing operations and maintenance is important to the long-term technical success of an ICM 

project. Successful technical and operational integration are typically based on a foundation of 

strong institutional integration, including associated managerial support and funding.

Involves coordination and collaboration between various agencies and 

jurisdictions (network owners) in support of ICM. Includes distributing 

specific operational responsibilities and sharing control functions in a 

manner that transcends institutional boundaries.

Involves implementing multi-agency transportation management strategies, 

often in real-time, that promote information sharing and cross-network 

coordination and operations among the various transportation networks in 

the corridor. Facilitates managing capacity and demand on the corridor. 

Provides the means (e.g., communication links between agencies, system 

interfaces, and the associated standards) by which information and system 

operations and control functions can be effectively shared and distributed 

among networks and their respective transportation management systems. 

It is also the means by which the impacts of operational decisions can be 

immediately viewed and evaluated by the affected agencies.

Management

ICM requires active management of the 

individual facilities within a corridor in order 

to optimize corridor performance. 

Management implies more than monitoring; it 

means taking action(s) to improve the 

performance of the system. Such management 

may take the form of dynamic traffic controls, 

priorities for transit vehicles, improved 

response to incidents, and more 

comprehensive and actionable traveler 

information. Agencies may need to enhance 

these types of capabilities on their networks in 

order to realize the full benefits of ICM.

TECHNICAL 

INTEGRATION

OPERATIONAL 

INTEGRATION

INSTITUTIONAL 

INTEGRATION

Figure 2. Illustration. The active management process.

Implement Dynamic

Monitor Syste

m

Actions

Evaluate

& Recommend

Assess System

Dynamic Actions

Performance

ACTIVE

MANAGEMENT

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

4

Diverse Stakeholder Group

Another important element of ICM is that it requires collaboration among a broad group of 

corridor stakeholders. Stakeholders are entities that interact with a system (i.e., those that make 

and are affected by operational decisions that impact the performance of the system). 

When considering stakeholders to include in an ICM project, implementers should cast a wide net 

and ask themselves who is missing from the group of stakeholders they typically engage with for 

operations projects. For example, for an ICM system, major stakeholders could include: 

• Travelers and Transportation Network Users – Individuals who use the transportation networks 

within a corridor to go from one location (origin) to another (destination), whether for personal use 

or business transportation, such as freight deliveries. Their trips within the corridor may involve 

traversing the entire corridor or going to one or more locations within the corridor. 

• Commercial and Government Entities – Individuals and organizations that are employers, service 

providers, or vendors of goods within the corridor. While these stakeholders may not travel within 

the corridor, they are interested in the ability of their employees and customers to do so. They will 

have major concerns if employees and customers are delayed or prevented from traveling. 

• Transportation Network Operators – Individuals who are responsible for managing the specific 

modal networks within the corridor, such as State and local DOTs, transit agencies, MPOs, toll road 

authorities, etc. This group may include the individuals or organizations entrusted with overall 

management of the ICM system. 

• Public Safety Personnel – Includes police, fire, safety patrol, and emergency services operators and 

staff that use the corridor to provide safety-related services. 

The ICM concept can take many forms. Implementers at each site that adopts ICM will likely 

have slightly different priorities and stakeholders they want to incorporate into their approach 

based on corridor travel patterns and needs. 

THE INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT RESEARCH INITIATIVE

The USDOT started the ICM Research Initiative in 2006 to explore and develop ICM concepts 

and approaches and to advance the deployment of ICM systems throughout the country. Initially, 

eight pioneer sites were selected to develop concepts of operations and system requirements for 

ICM on a congested corridor in their region. Three of these sites went on to conduct analysis, 

modeling, and simulation of potential ICM response strategies on their corridor. In the final stage, 

two sites —the US-75 Corridor in Dallas, Texas, and the Interstate 15 (I-15) corridor in San 

Diego, California—were selected to design, deploy, and demonstrate their ICM systems. 

The Dallas and San Diego demonstrations “went live” in the spring of 2013. Each demonstration 

has two phases: design and deployment, and operations and maintenance. Both sites chose to 

develop a decision support system (DSS) as a technical tool to facilitate the application of 

institutional agreements and operational approaches that corridor stakeholders agreed to over a 

rigorous planning and design process. 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

5

Although the DSS approach at each site differs 

slightly, the basic process is similar. The DSS gathers 

traffic data from an array of ITS in the network and 

uses this information to forecast future conditions on 

the corridor. If an event (recurring or non-recurring) 

occurs that is predicted to meet pre-established 

congestion thresholds, the DSS generates response 

plans. These plans contain combinations of 

multimodal strategies to address specific congestion 

scenarios. Response plans are based on detailed 

business rules that establish the conditions under 

which assets can be used, which may vary based on 

the magnitude of the event, time of day, congestion 

levels on the network, etc., as well as by policy 

constraints. The DSS recommends and ranks 

response plans by running a simulation to determine 

which plan will most effectively address the 

congestion. Operating agencies are alerted to either 

accept or reject the plans; if accepted, the plan will be implemented.

The USDOT is conducting 

independent “before-after” analyses 

to evaluate the benefits of ICM on 

transportation operator situational 

awareness, response and control, 

traveler information, and overall 

corridor performance at each site. 

The experiences and lessons learned 

from the demonstration sites are 

being actively shared with the 

transportation community so that 

regions interested in ICM can 

leverage the knowledge gained to 

better shape a successful 

deployment for their corridor(s).

Although the demonstration sites 

provide valuable insights into the 

necessary components of building an ICM system, they do not represent the only way to 

implement ICM. There is no “one-size-fits-all” approach to ICM, since the circumstances of a 

particular corridor will vary based on traffic patterns, agency dynamics, available assets, and a 

host of other factors.

What could an integrated 

corridor management (ICM) 

response plan look like?

A major incident has occurred on the 

freeway in an ICM corridor. Travelers 

are advised via dynamic message sign 

and other traveler information sources 

(e.g., 511) to take a parallel route or 

shift to transit, where there is spare 

capacity. Signal timing on the parallel 

route is changed to better manage the 

flow of the detoured traffic, and transit 

operators prepare for the increased 

volumes by adding more buses along 

the impacted route.

Figure 3. Map. American Transportation Research Institute 

truck global positioning system data.

Source: American Transportation Research Institute
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

6

THE FREIGHT CHALLENGE

Freight is big business in the United States, moving tons of general and bulk commodities by 

truck, rail, air, water and pipeline. In 2013, a total of 14.01 billion tons of goods were transported 

in the United States by one of the modes.1

 The majority of freight moves by truck, making the 

trucking industry a key component of the U.S. economy. With $687.1 billion in gross revenues in 

2013, trucking represented 81.2 percent of the U.S. freight bill in 20132

 and just over 4 percent of 

the Nation’s gross domestic product. In terms of tonnage, trucks transported 9.7 billion tons of 

freight in 2013, representing 69.1 percent of total domestic tonnage.3

To offer perspective on the size and scope of the trucking industry, Figure 4 (below) shows truck 

position reads (pings) from trucks tracked by the American Transportation Research Institute 

(ATRI) as part of its Freight Performance Measures4

 program. The image shows only one day of 

data from June 2013.

The forecast for the future indicates that trucking’s share of freight movement will increase. 

According to the American Trucking Associations, total tonnage moved will increase to 17.3 

billion tons in 2025, with 71.4 percent of that tonnage moved by truck.5

Figure 4. Map. Cost of congestion on a per-mile basis.

1 American Trucking Associations. (2014) U.S. Freight Transportation Forecast to 2025. Arlington, VA. 

2 American Trucking Associations. (2014) American Trucking Trends 2014. Arlington, VA.

3 Ibid.

4 For more on the Freight Performance Measures Program, visit www.atri-online.org.

5 American Trucking Associations. (2014) U.S. Freight Transportation Forecast to 2025. Arlington, VA. 

Source: American Transportation Research Institute
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

7

There are more than 1.3 million interstate motor carriers in the United States, of which 34.6 percent 

are for-hire motor carriers.6

 For-hire carriers provide freight transportation services to the general 

public. An additional 53.2 percent of motor carriers are private fleets,7

 carriers whose primary 

business is not hauling freight but transporting goods in support of their primary business, such as 

retail (Wal-Mart) or food and beverage (Frito-Lay). 

Among for-hire carriers, there are three key sectors; truckload (TL), less-than-truckload (LTL) 

and specialized. TL fleets typically haul a dedicated load of freight for one customer (shipper) to 

a specific destination (receiver or consignee). LTL carriers pick up smaller shipments and return 

to a terminal where the packages are unloaded, sorted, and consolidated with other shipments 

going to similar locations. Specialized carriers operate equipment designed for hauling specific 

commodities such as flatbed trailers, tank trucks, and specially permitted oversize and 

overweight loads. 

One commonality among all motor carriers – for-hire, private, TL, LTL or specialized – is their 

operating environment. Trucks use the roadways as their workplace, and in 2012 trucks logged 

421.3 billion miles on those roadways.8

 This operating environment continues to become more 

challenging each year as congestion, both recurring and non-recurring, clogs the system. 

On average, it costs $67.00 per hour to operate a truck, and 64 percent of that cost is attributed to fuel 

costs and driver wages.9

 Both cost centers are negatively impacted by congestion. Fuel is burned (and 

emissions generated) when trucks sit stuck in traffic. Driver time is expended on non-revenue 

generating activities and available driver hours-of-service are wasted. In 2013, weekday congestion on 

the Interstate system alone was estimated to cost the trucking industry $9.2 billion.10 Total delay was 

141 million hours, equating to over 51,000 truck drivers sitting idle for an entire working year.11 Nearly 

90 percent of the industry’s congestion costs were concentrated on just 12 percent of the Interstate 

mileage in 2013 (Figure 4.).12

Congestion impacts on the trucking industry are costly, and with projections for increased freight 

demand and truck transportation, the problem will only worsen unless new solutions and 

approaches for dealing with congestion are identified. In an annual survey of trucking industry 

stakeholders, congestion has ranked as a top 10 trucking industry concern for the past 10 years.13

6 American Trucking Associations. (2014) American Trucking Trends 2014. Arlington, VA.

7 Ibid. 

8 Ibid. 

9 Torrey, W.F. (2014) An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: A 2014 Update. American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

10 Pierce., D. & Murray, D. (2014) Cost of Congestion to the Trucking Industry. American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

11 Ibid. 

12 Ibid.

13 American Transportation Research Institute. (2014) Critical Issues in the Trucking Industry 2014. Arlington, VA.

INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

9

BENEFITS OF INTEGRATION 

Tons of freight move through the Nation’s major urban areas, as evidenced by the 12 percent of 

miles where the bulk of the trucking industry’s congestion costs are generated. Many of these 

urban areas’ freight corridors are also candidate integrated corridor management (ICM) 

corridors. Therefore, freight providers constitute an important ICM end-user that should not be 

overlooked in the conceptualization and design of an ICM system. 

Implementing ICM could result in many benefits for freight operators if they are effectively 

integrated into the ICM approach. The most significant benefit of ICM to freight stakeholders is 

improved situational awareness of conditions on the corridor. While unreliable road conditions 

affect us all, few are more affected than freight transportation providers, and specifically motor 

carriers. The costs that they experience from congestion are felt throughout the supply chain and 

eventually are paid by consumers in the form of higher prices on all the goods and products we 

rely on daily. 

In addition, motor carriers today have little insight into specific planned work zones or 

congestion management strategies being deployed by the various operating agencies along a 

specific corridor. Where they do have access to the information, these operations are generally 

not planned, executed, or communicated in an integrated fashion. Often, motor carriers and their 

drivers rely on information passed along through the media or from drivers to their dispatchers 

and operations personnel. 

Figure 5. Illustration. Benefits of integrating freight and integrated corridor management.

• More timely, 

reliable 

information on 

work zones, 

incidents, etc.

• Improved route 

planning to avoid 

delays

• Reduced costs 

through better 

decision making

• Forum for 

collaboration

• Improved 

corridor 

performance

• Buy-in from 

influential 

stakeholder 

group

• User’s 

perspective of 

corridor

• More robust 

data

Benefits for...

FREIGHT CORRIDOR OPERAT

O

R

S

Source: Federal Highway Administration
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 0

In an ICM corridor, freight stakeholders can receive regular, validated information updates from 

managing agencies across the length of the corridor. This could include not only travel times but 

also information on incidents, work zones, road closures, and suggested alternate routes. Armed 

with this information, motor carriers and drivers can select alternate routes, notify shippers and 

receivers of pick-up and delivery times, and make informed choices about scheduling off-duty 

and rest periods to remain compliant with hours-of-service (HOS) rules. By becoming involved 

in the ICM planning process, freight stakeholders could also help shape additional information 

that they would like to receive through the ICM platform, such as information on truck parking 

availability and truck restrictions on proposed alternate routes. 

Just as ICM partners seek to optimize the use of existing infrastructure assets and unused 

capacity along the Nation’s urban corridors, freight stakeholders also focus on equipment 

optimization and identifying available capacity. Equipped with better information, freight 

providers could be more proactive in their selection of routes, timing of deliveries, or 

management of truck driver HOS and available equipment. Avoiding congested routes could also 

help providers cut down on operational costs through fuel, driver, and equipment savings.

The benefits of integrating ICM and freight apply not just to freight operators but to the 

stakeholders who are leading an ICM project in a region. Gaining buy-in from freight 

stakeholders can help project leaders make a case for ICM in a region. In addition, gathering the 

perspective of freight operators who regularly travel the corridor will provide a more robust 

picture of travel from the user’s perspective, such as particular problem areas. Additionally, 

adding freight data into the ICM mix provides a more robust picture of traffic conditions within a 

corridor or region.

Another advantage that ICM offers to both operating agencies and stakeholders is that it provides 

freight stakeholders with a forum for collaboration. In some regions, public agencies may not be 

fully aware of some of the challenges that freight providers face. Bringing freight stakeholders to 

the table gives them an opportunity to explain these challenges and help to design a system that 

could better meet their needs. This dialogue could extend to discussions about potential 

operational strategies that could improve freight performance. The ICM analysis, modeling, and 

simulation methodology may provide a robust framework for applying freight domain supply 

chain software and modeling to identify potential benefits of freight operational strategies such as 

off-hour freight deliveries, which reduce the impact of truck traffic during peak congestion times. 

Through collaboration, both public sector and freight stakeholders could gain insight into 

strategies that they may not have otherwise considered. 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 1

OPPORTUNITIES FOR INTEGRATION

There are numerous opportunities for integrating freight into an integrated corridor management 

(ICM) process. ICM project teams can leverage existing platforms and initiatives to engage 

freight stakeholders and incorporate freight strategies into an ICM concept. However, as outlined 

in the table below, there are also significant challenges associated with connecting ICM and 

freight. The following sections will explore these institutional, operational, and technical 

challenges in more detail. 

OPPORTUNITIES CHALLENGES

Urban freight corridors are bogged down by 

congestion due to twice-daily rush hour, special 

events, work zones, and incidents. ICM strategies 

that mitigate the effects of these benefit freight 

transportation providers along the corridor.

Securing agreements among institutional partners 

on data sharing and new ways of operating is 

perhaps the greatest challenge for both freight and 

ICM stakeholders.

ICM mobility and environmental benefits to 

corridors and corridor users are of interest to 

freight corridor stakeholders. Collaboration can 

help achieve these benefits.

Freight initiatives and ICM both seek to integrate 

available, and sometimes spotty, data for a more 

complete, real-time, shared picture of roadway 

conditions and available capacity.

ICM analysis, modeling, and simulation 

methodology provides a robust framework for 

applying freight domain supply chain software/

modeling to identify potential benefits of off-hour 

delivery strategies, a key freight strategy of 

increased interest in urban areas.

Both freight and ICM seek to deliver more 

comprehensive information on available capacity 

and road conditions to road users in an actionable 

and instantly usable fashion.

Enhanced traveler information strategies developed 

for freight transportation providers and commuters 

may offer synergies.

Currently, most ICM approaches in practice are 

oriented toward passenger travel. Additional 

research on freight routes, data opportunities and 

gaps, and stakeholders may be required.

ICM= integrated corridor management

Table 1. Opportunities and challenges associated with integrated corridor management and freight.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 2

INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRATION

Institutional integration involves coordination and collaboration between various agencies and 

stakeholder groups in support of ICM, including the distribution of specific operational 

responsibilities and the sharing of control functions in a manner that transcends institutional 

boundaries. Understanding who the freight stakeholders are is the first step in identifying the 

right individuals to engage in ICM. In addition to trucking stakeholders, potential ICM 

participants on the freight side include railroads, air cargo providers, port and cargo facilities, 

and manufacturing businesses that rely on just-in-time freight deliveries. 

Trucking

Each state has a state trucking association (STA) 

whose mission is to represent the interest of its 

members (typically motor carriers and industry 

suppliers) in the state. Contacting the STA is a 

logical first step in identifying the motor carriers 

operating in a specific ICM corridor. Through the 

STA, ICM partners are able to connect with both 

for-hire and private fleet operators. The Appendix 

contains a list of STA websites. 

In addition to motor carriers/fleet operators, 

commercial truck drivers also represent an 

important trucking stakeholder. In 2012 there were 

3.2 million truck drivers.14 Truck drivers can be 

company drivers (who work for a motor carrier/fleet 

operator) or owner-operators who may be 

independent contractors; i.e., individuals who 

operate under their own authority and contract their 

services out to trucking fleets, shippers, and 

receivers. 

Cargo Facilities and Customers 

There are other modes that haul freight (e.g., rail, 

air cargo, and water) and they all connect with 

trucks at intermodal yards, airports, and maritime and cargo facilities, making these interests 

potential stakeholders in ICM. In addition, manufacturing businesses that rely on just-in-time 

deliveries to keep production lines moving share similar transportation management objectives 

with ICM, as do retailers and other businesses that utilize just-in-time deliveries of goods to 

minimize inventory costs while continually meeting consumer demand. 

Who are freight 

stakeholders?

• Trucking:

» Motor carriers.

» Fleet owner/operators. 

» Commercial truck drivers.

• Cargo Facilities:

» Railroads.

» Air cargo. 

» Ports/maritime cargo 

facilities. 

» Intermodal yards. 

• Customers:

» Businesses that rely on 

on-time deliveries (end 

customers).

» Individual recipients 

(residential or single 

business delivery).

14 American Trucking Associations. (2014) American Trucking Trends 2014. Arlington, VA.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 3

Opportunities for Institutional Integration

Make a Compelling Case for Integrated Corridor Management

When freight stakeholders operate along an ICM corridor, their goals and objectives often 

intersect with ICM. In order to gain buy-in and support from freight stakeholders, ICM project 

leaders should be prepared to effectively articulate how ICM could help achieve freight-specific 

goals and objectives. 

FREIGHT STAKEHOLDER 

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES WHY IT MATTERS

On-Time Pick-Ups and 

Deliveries

• Contracts for freight services often include very specific time 

windows for pick-ups and deliveries, and penalties for missing those 

windows can be costly.

• Commercial drivers are regulated by Federal hours-of-service rules, 

which limit the hours each day that drivers can be on-duty and 

driving, and any delays in a driver’s schedule can impact their 

availability to work later in the day and week.

Improved Travel Reliability • Reliable travel times allow freight transportation providers to 

accurately manage loads and equipment, schedule pick-up and 

delivery times, and plan for mandated driver rest breaks. 

Reduced Fuel Consumption • Fuel represents the single highest individual cost center for most 

motor carriers – in 2013, fuel costs represented 38 percent of the total 

average cost per mile to operate a truck.1

• Idling trucks can consume anywhere from 1⁄2 to 1 gallon per hour.2

• Medium- and heavy-duty trucks account for 22 percent of 

transportation-related greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions, which 

equates to roughly 6 percent of total U.S. GHG emissions.3

1 Torrey, W.F. (2014) An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: A 2014 Update. American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

2 American Transportation Research Institute. Sustainable Freight Practices for the Trucking Industry. Available online: http://atri-online.org/sustainabledriving-practices/#Idling 

3 U.S. EPA. Inventory of U.S. Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Sinks, 1990-2012. (April 2014) Available online: http://www.epa.gov/climatechange/

ghgemissions/usinventoryreport.html

Table 2. Freight stakeholder goals and objectives.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 4

FREIGHT STAKEHOLDER 

GOALS AND OBJECTIVES WHY IT MATTERS

Reduced Labor and Vehicle 

Maintenance Costs 

• The trucking industry faces a significant driver shortage. American 

Transportation Research Institute estimates that the industry will 

need nearly 100,000 new drivers each year for the next 10 years to 

meet demand and replace those drivers who are leaving the industry 

due to retirement or other careers.4 The driver shortage is pushing 

driver wages higher, making the non-revenue-generating labor hours 

that drivers spend stuck in traffic more costly. 

• The highest industry costs per mile for vehicle repair and 

maintenance are experienced by less-than-truckload carriers whose 

operations are often focused on pick-up and delivery in congested 

urban areas.5

Reduced Crash Involvement • According to the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration 

(FMCSA), the estimated cost of all large truck and bus (10,000 lbs. 

and higher) crashes in 2011 was $87 billion.6

• Research that compared crash involvement rates for medium-duty 

(10,001 - 26,000 lbs.) and heavy-duty (26,001 lbs. and greater) trucks 

found the highest crash rate index for medium-duty trucks in the 

central counties of metropolitan areas with populations over 1 

million.7

Leverage Existing Forums for Collaboration

In addition to reaching out to the STA to identify motor carriers operating in the corridor, another 

avenue for engaging the freight community in ICM is through existing freight stakeholder groups 

that may have been organized by the State department of transportation (DOT) or metropolitan 

planning organization (MPO) (see callout box on next page). These groups typically have a strong 

network of contacts within the diverse freight community. In some cases, they may already be 

exploring potential improvement projects and have engaged the relevant contacts. 

MAP-21 brought a renewed focus on the significance of freight, and as part of the highway 

authorization, the U.S. Department of Transportation (USDOT) is encouraging States to create 

freight advisory committees to include a representative cross section of public- and private-sector 

freight stakeholders.15 The charge for these committees is typically to develop a comprehensive 

freight plan mapping out near- and long-term freight investments for the State, so it is a logical 

venue for engaging the freight community on ICM and its benefits to freight movement.

4 American Trucking Associations. (2012) ATA Benchmarking Guide for Driver Recruitment and Retention. Arlington, VA. 

5 Torrey, W.F. (2014) An Analysis of the Operational Costs of Trucking: A 2014 Update. American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

6 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration. (2013) Commercial Motor Vehicle Facts – March 2013. Available online at: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/sites/

fmcsa.dot.gov/files/docs/Commercial_Motor_Vechicle_Facts_March_2013.pdf

7 Pierce, D. & Park, L. (2013) Large Truck Safety Trends. American Transportation Research Institute. Arlington, VA.

15 Federal Highway Administration. “MAP-21 – Moving Ahead for Progress in the 21st Century” web page. Fact Sheet – Significant Freight Provisions. 

Available online at: https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/map21/factsheets/freight.cfm

Table 2. Freight stakeholder goals and objectives. (cont’d.)
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 5

In addition, the GROW AMERICA Act, the surface transportation reauthorization legislation 

proposed early in 2015, would fund efforts in which States and multimodal stakeholders 

collaborate to improve freight mobility.16 These initiatives will encourage the formation of freight 

planning groups where they do not already exist and may provide a platform for public sector 

ICM and freight partners to come together.

Challenges to Institutional Integration

While benefits accrue to both ICM and freight stakeholders from institutional integration, the 

process is not without its challenges. First, the private sector is generally reluctant to actively 

engage in public sector-led activities without a well-defined return on investment (ROI). It may 

be difficult to convince the private sector of their role in a public sector project or how they are 

impacted. Quantifying ROI may be hindered by the very different time horizons under which 

public and private sector entities operate. Public sector initiatives often evaluate project success 

on a continuum spanning 5-10 years, while a long-term outlook for private sector freight 

stakeholders to experience a positive ROI may be 6-18 months. 

Freight stakeholders can also be challenging to engage in a public sector-driven initiative because 

their planning windows are often much shorter and more elastic than those of the public sector; 

because decisions are made often at corporate levels, which may not be in an area of impact; and 

because there are numerous stakeholders in the private sector (many shippers, carriers and 

customers). If engaged, it can be even harder to sustain their commitment throughout a project’s 

lifecycle due to their focus on business operations. A particular struggle with the private sector is 

the amount of time individuals have available to participate in research-oriented efforts, where 

uncertainty is expected in terms of schedule and the level of benefits that can be achieved.

Delaware Valley Goods Movement Task Force

The Delaware Valley Goods Movement Task Force is an example of an existing institutional body that could 

be used to engage regional freight stakeholders in integrated corridor management. The Task Force is a 

freight advisory committee co-chaired by the Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission and 

Pennsylvania Department of Transportation. 

The objectives of the Task Force are to: 

• Ensure the participation of the freight industry in the planning process.

• Identify improvements to facilitate the safe and efficient movement of freight.

• Implement regional congestion and intermodal management programs.

• Improve communications and data and technology sharing.

Membership is open to all members of the freight community, and the group meets on a quarterly basis. 

Source: Delaware Valley Good Movement Task Force Website, Delaware Valley Regional Planning Commission, 

Accessed 26 Jan 2015. http://www.dvrpc.org/Freight/DVGMTF.htm

16 U.S. Department of Transportation, “Investing in our Freight System to Grow the American Economy,” GROW AMERICA: Expanding our ability to move 

freight, http://www.dot.gov/grow-america/fact-sheets/freight.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 6

Another challenge to including freight groups in an ICM project is securing institutional 

agreements on data sharing and operations – especially among private sector freight stakeholders 

whose data are highly sensitive and proprietary. Closely related, it may also be difficult to bring 

freight stakeholders together in some regions due to both competing priorities—these 

organizations are running businesses—as well as inter-organizational competition among 

themselves.

OPERATIONAL INTEGRATION 

Operational integration involves implementing multi-agency transportation management 

strategies, often in real-time, that both promote information sharing and coordinated operations 

across the various transportation networks in the corridor as well as facilitate management of the 

total capacity and demand of the corridor. Designing an operational response requires taking 

multiple factors into account:17 

• Assets – All of the potential networks, 

routes, systems, and capabilities along the 

corridor that could potentially be used as 

part of a response.

• Availability – The status of the assets and 

whether they are currently available for 

use as part of a response. Availability can 

be limited based on time of day and other 

factors; for example, it may be 

impermissible to re-route traffic along a 

certain arterial during school zone hours.

• Scale of Response – A response may be 

conservative, medium, or aggressive based 

on the predicted impact of an event, 

which is defined by an integrated 

performance metric (e.g., person-miles 

traveled). The assets that will be used 

may vary based on the scale of the 

response. For example, at the Dallas 

demonstration site, travelers are advised to 

take transit only if a major incident of a 

certain magnitude occurs on the freeway.

17 Adapted from San Diego Association of Governments presentation, A. Estrella, “I-15 San Diego Integrated Corridor Management Project,” ITS America 

Annual Meeting 2013, Nashville, TN, 22 April 2013.

18 Figure adapted from a San Diego Association of Governments presentation by A. Estrella, “I-15 San Diego Integrated Corridor Management Project,” ITS 

America Annual Meeting 2013, Nashville, TN, 22 April 2013.

RESPONSE 

PLAN

ASSETS

SCALE OF

RESPONSE

AVAILABILITY

Figure 6. Diagram. Dynamic response plan 

selection process.18

(adapted from San Diego Association of Governments diagram)
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 7

Opportunities for Operational Integration 

Operational integration for ICM within a freight context would involve designing response plans 

that consider freight operators as users of the system. This may simply involve providing freight 

operators with visibility into conditions on the system, or it may involve response plans that 

include freight-related strategies. Several opportunities for incorporating freight into operational 

responses are described below.

When regional transportation authorities decide to pursue ICM, they should start by considering 

the full range of potential freight-related strategies that could improve operations along the 

corridor. However, a detailed analysis needs to be conducted to ensure that the best alternatives 

are identified. What may work for one region may not work for another.

Freight-Specific Travel Information

As described above, one major challenge in freight operations is a lack of advance planning and 

real-time information. This can negatively impact:19

• Efficient movement of freight transportation.

• Congestion on roads and long lines at terminal gates.

• Planning of freight daily work activities.

• Logistics management systems.

• Environment of neighboring communities.

• Energy consumption.

• Safety of the traveling public.

ICM provides a more holistic view of conditions on a corridor by combining multimodal 

information. This information can be pushed to the public through a 511 system or by private 

sector companies who re-purpose the data for smart phone applications. Freight operators can 

benefit from this information since it allows them to better plan their routes to avoid congestion. 

However, freight operators may require additional information beyond what would be relevant to 

the traveling public. 

To address this need, the USDOT has led several intelligent transportation system (ITS) projects 

that combine data from multiple sources in order to provide real-time, freight-specific 

information to stakeholders so that they can plan routes and dynamically manage their operations 

more efficiently. These initiatives – described in more detail below – could provide tools to 

integrate freight information into an ICM approach.

19 M. Mollaghasemi, “Freight Advanced Traveler Information Systems (FRATIS) – Overview and Results,” presented at ITS America workshop on DSS for ICM 

Stakeholders, 6 August 2014.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 8

Cross-Town Improvement Project 

The Cross-Town Improvement Project (C-TIP) was developed to improve efficiency for freight 

operators by providing timely and useful information on loads. The first iteration of the project 

consisted only of a high-level concept that incorporated an “intermodal move database” for 

coordinating cross-town traffic to reduce empty moves between terminals. It loosely defined 

ideas for tracking intermodal assets and distributing information to truckers wirelessly. The 

second iteration created specific applications geared toward providing data to wireless devices, 

including work order, traffic, and routing information.

Numerous private sector entities had a stake in the C-TIP design and test results, including Class I 

railroads, dray operators/terminal operators, and third party technology providers, developers, 

and subcontractors. The Class I railroads were key data providers, while the dray carriers and 

terminal operators were critical end users of the C-TIP applications, especially the components 

that were deployed via mobile device. 

As C-TIP evolved due to changing freight flows and private sector participation, the program, 

which was field-tested in Kansas City in 2011, ultimately consisted of:

• Simulated testing of an intermodal move exchange (IMEX) application’s ability to reduce 

bobtail moves (i.e., trips in which a truck is not carrying a chassis, trailer, or container) 

and match loads in other locations given the significant reduction in cross-town moves in 

Kansas City.

• A collaborative dispatch model allowing freight railroads and dray carriers to easily 

identify load matching opportunities.

• An in-cab, real-time traffic monitoring (RTTM) smart phone application that provided

real-time traffic and routing information from the Kansas City traffic management center, 

KC Scout, to dray truck drivers. The final real-time traffic monitoring application included 

dynamic route guidance (DRG). 

• An Open Source Architecture Package (OSAP) that provided dray dispatchers with realtime driver location data and a wireless communications platform for delivering work 

orders to drivers, allowing for easy identification of load matching opportunities and 

thereby reducing unproductive bobtails. The final package was turned into a wireless 

drayage updating (WDU) application.

Each application within C-TIP required specific data elements to be collected, analyzed, and 

disseminated. The IMEX application facilitated the exchange of load data and availability 

information between railroads, terminal operators, and trucking companies. All participating 

railroads had to provide load information, yet each had a different process. A common 

application (IMEX) and architecture (Electronic Freight Management) was used to overcome this 

challenge. Chassis pool operators provided equipment information.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

1 9

The RTTM provided a means for up-to-the minute information regarding roadway conditions, 

travel speeds, and predicted travel times to be captured and passed along to the trucking 

community. A separate database system was used to collect and distribute the information, but 

was integrated with IMEX. The DRG feature leveraged the real-time information to identify 

alternate routing information for the truck drivers. 

The goal of WDU was to distribute information inexpensively to drivers regarding planned, 

current, and pending load assignment; pickup and delivery instructions and verification; and 

traffic congestion information. Key pieces of information about each order were provided back to 

the dray companies to execute the moves, including work order, driver itinerary, and load status. 

The figure below summarizes the components of C-TIP in Kansas City, including the external 

data sources integrated into the applications.

WDU 

Application

DRG 

Application

RTTM Application

Incident Reports

WDU or 

Third Party

IMEX 

Application

Roadway Sensors

Eyewitness

 Reports

MO Statewide 

Data

KC Scout TMC Traffic & Route 

Data

Truck Telemetry

Figure 7. Diagram. Overview of Kansas City Cross-Town Improvement Project components and data sources.

Source: Federal Highway Administration

DRG = dynamic route guidance

IMEX = intermodal move exchange

KC = Kansas City

MO = Missouri

RTTM = real-time traffic monitoring 

TMC = transportation management center

WDU = wireless drayage updating 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 0

The initial Kansas City deployment test of the RTTM and DRG proved that the applications could 

provide public and private sector benefits, such as congestion mitigation, emissions reductions, and 

truck travel time savings. During the 4-month test period, measured benefits included:

• Greenhouse gas emissions reductions of about 163,000 grams of carbon dioxide (CO2) 

equivalents.

• Through initial route recommendations at trip outset, RTTM saved drivers on one Kansas 

City intermodal lane an average of 6 minutes per trip. 

• Out of 95 total trips on 5 intermodal lanes, DRG redirected trucks 30 times on 3 lanes, with 

travel time savings ranging from 5 to 7 minutes per trip.

In addition to the deployment test, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) conducted a 

simulation of the C-TIP applications in both Kansas City and Chicago. The results showed that in 

Kansas City, IMEX could have eliminated 135 bobtail trips over a 4-month period, thereby 

eliminating over 1,000 empty truck miles and saving 180 gallons of diesel fuel. This would have 

reduced greenhouse gases by about 2.6 million grams and criteria pollutants by almost 19,000 

grams, if C-TIP were fully utilized by all stakeholders.

In Chicago, C-TIP could have matched between 415 

and 2,000 loads during a 4 month period, depending on 

the size of the cross-town delivery window. This would 

save between 1,700 and 8,000 gallons of diesel fuel, 

with concomitant reductions in greenhouse gas and 

criteria pollutant emissions.

As part of a separate drayage optimization test, the 

C-TIP team used the OSAP to develop an automated 

dispatch system for Pride Logistics. The system 

allowed dispatchers to better allocate resources 

throughout the day, eliminating most of the manual 

effort involved in the dispatch operation and better 

identifying load matching opportunities. The number of bobtail trips and the percentage of miles 

in bobtail miles fell by approximately half during the test, while the number of total loads grew. 

Similarly, a C-TIP OSAP deployment by IXT in Kansas City contributed to a 13 percent 

reduction in bobtail records even as revenue loads remained stable.

Freight Advanced Traveler Information System 

The purpose of the Freight Advanced Traveler Information System (FRATIS) is to provide 

real-time information to freight companies to support dynamic planning and efficient decision 

making. The FRATIS effort is a part of the USDOT Dynamic Mobility Applications (DMA) 

program, which seeks to develop and promote innovative applications and concepts that leverage 

the increasing volume and quality of data generated due to connected vehicles. FRATIS also 

builds off of complementary FHWA efforts designed to improve freight efficiency, including 

C-TIP. 

Dallas-Fort Worth Freight 

Advanced Traveler 

Information System 

Demonstration Stakeholders

• Associated Carriers (Dray Carrier).

• Southwest Freight (Dray Carrier).

• Intermodal Cartage Group 

(Container Yard).

• BNSF Railway.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 1

Two applications comprise FRATIS:

• Freight-Specific Dynamic Travel Planning and Performance – This application enhances 

existing traveler information systems – both public and private sector – to address freightspecific needs. It integrates data on wait times at intermodal facilities, traffic conditions 

(including speeds and volumes), incidents, road closures and work zones, route restrictions 

(e.g., hazardous materials, oversize/overweight), and truck parking availability. The 

application also provides adaptive communication between drayage companies, drivers, and 

intermodal facilities, along with real-time information and dynamic routing for drivers.

• Drayage Optimization – This application seeks to optimize truck/load movements between 

freight facilities. Using travel information and port terminal conditions, it assigns individual 

trucks with “best time” windows for pick-up or drop-off so that each can optimize 

operations. This application requires extensive communication from a wide range of freight 

entities, including rail carriers, MPOs, traffic management centers, customers, and carriers.

Both applications have two levels – a basic application, developed from open-source data and 

services and available in the public realm; and a “value-added” commercial application targeted 

at existing subscriber user groups.20

FRATIS prototype applications are being developed and demonstrated at three sites: Dallas-Fort 

Worth (DFW), the Los Angeles-Gateway Region, and South Florida. The DFW prototype 

incorporates size and weight permitting and a Bluetooth wait time system in a terminal that 

calculates real-time, historic, and predicted wait time. This information is provided to drivers, 

dispatchers, and terminal staff via the FRATIS server to web and mobile applications.

20 USDOT, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, “Dynamic Mobility 

Applications” web page. Available at: http://its.dot.gov/dma/index.htm 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 2

For drayage optimization, the DFW FRATIS prototype relies on significant amounts of data from 

the dray company’s operating system software, including order number, type, origin and 

destination, and appointment time/window. Information from the dray company’s software is also 

used to generate emails to participating terminal operators (a rail facility and a container yard) 

regarding the number and type of orders from the participating dray carriers that day. 

21 USDOT, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Intelligent Transportation Systems Joint Program Office, “Dynamic Mobility 

Applications” web page. Available at: http://its.dot.gov/dma/index.htm 

Figure 8. Diagram. Architecture of the Dallas-Fort Worth Freight Advanced Traveler 

Information System prototype.

Source: Federal Highway Administration

FHWA = Federal Highway Administration

DOT = department of transportation 

MPO = metropolitan planning organization

FRATIS = Freight Advanced Traveler 

 Information System

DSRC = dedicated short range communications

App = application
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 3

Figure 9. Illustration. An eco-freight signal 

priority application.

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation

For the wait time system, Wi-Fi and Bluetooth readers are installed at the participating container 

yard. The readers record when a mobile device inside a vehicle passes a point on the road into the 

terminal and when that same device passes through the gate to enter and exit the yard. This 

information is passed to a server for analysis and display of the actual, current wait time at the 

yard. In addition, the data are stored and used to calculate predicted wait time by time of day and 

day of week. 

Expected benefits of the FRATIS prototype demonstrations include reductions in:

• Number of bobtails. 

• Travel time (i.e., origin to destination). 

• Fuel consumption. 

• Emissions.

• Terminal queue time (i.e., the amount of time a truck spends waiting to 

get into the intermodal terminal).

Freight Signal Priority

As part of the Dynamic Mobility Applications 

program, the USDOT is exploring the possibilities for 

smarter traffic signal timing using vehicle-toinfrastructure communications. The Multi-Modal 

Intelligent Traffic Signal Systems is a bundle of 

applications that allows traffic signals to be monitored 

and adjusted in real-time to maximize traffic flows or 

to accommodate specific user groups, such as freight, 

transit, emergency vehicles, and pedestrians. The 

Freight Signal Priority application provides signal 

priority to trucks near freight facilities based on 

current and projected freight movements. The goal of 

this application is “to reduce delays and increase travel 

time reliability for freight traffic while enhancing 

safety at key intersections.”21

A similar application is being explored under the 

USDOT ITS Joint Program Office’s Applications for 

the Environment: Real-time Information Synthesis 

program. The Eco-Freight Signal Priority application 

gives signal priority to freight vehicles approaching a 

signalized intersection, taking into consideration the vehicle’s location, speed, type, and weight. 

Priority decisions are based on real-time traffic and emissions data to produce the least amount of 

emissions at signalized intersections. Preliminary modeling results showed that Eco-Freight Signal 

22 USDOT, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Research and Technology, Combined Modeling of Eco-Signal Operations Applications, Applications for the 

Environment: Real Time information Synthesis (AERIS) Program Summer Webinar Series, 25 June 2015. Available at http://www.its.dot.gov/aeris/pdf/EcoSignal_Operations_Combined_Modeling_webinar_final_062414.pdf. 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 4

Priority provides up to 4 percent fuel reduction benefits for freight vehicles, which equates to up to 

$649,000 annual savings for a fleet of 1,000 city delivery vehicles driving 30,000 miles on arterials 

each year. For a large fleet of 80,000 vehicles, this would result in annual savings of $51 million.22

Although these applications of freight signal priority may not be immediately implementable since it 

will take time for roadside infrastructure and freight vehicles to be equipped with connected vehicle 

technology, it is an innovative strategy that regions implementing ICM could consider in their longterm version, particularly if their corridor experiences heavy freight traffic. Freight signal priority also 

offers an incentive for freight stakeholders to participate in an ICM initiative as the application could 

create a smoother travel experience for drivers on arterials. With less delay at intersections, drivers 

would be better equipped to make on-time deliveries, and fuel consumption and emissions due to 

idling at intersections could be reduced.

Truck Parking Guidance

Truck drivers must follow Federal hours-of-service (HOS) rules that require them to take anywhere 

from a 30-minute to an 8-hour or longer break before continuing to operate legally. In order to take 

these breaks, drivers need to be able to find legal and safe parking spaces to pull over. Several efforts 

are underway to explore how to gather truck parking availability information and disseminate it to 

trucking companies and drivers, potentially facilitating spot reservations. 

At present, very few operational systems exist for commercial drivers to access information on truck 

parking availability. Although some private parking facilities offer parking availability information 

through mobile phone applications, these systems rely on cumbersome manual data collection and are 

not widely deployed. In addition, the National Association of Truck Stop Operators maintains a 

directory of truck stop locations and has an outreach campaign to enable truck stop operators to 

promote their facilities. However, these services do not provide real-time information on truck parking 

availability. 

Commercial drivers typically rely on information provided by a dispatcher or “word of mouth” from 

other drivers to identify available spaces. They also make frequent use of public rest stop parking 

facilities rather than venture off their routes to see if a private facility has available spaces. ITS-based 

truck parking systems are in various stages of development in California, Michigan, and Minnesota 

(see callout box), as well as along the I-95 corridor from Connecticut to North Carolina. These projects 

are supported through the Safe, Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: A Legacy 

for Users, Section 1305, Truck Parking Facilities Program.

What is needed with respect to future truck parking projects and systems is for space availability 

information to be provided directly to the driver. ICM may provide a forum for truck parking 

information to become more dynamic, first by providing this information directly to the driver, 

perhaps automatically in response to an incident or congestion ahead on the drivers’ route, and second 

by allowing the driver to interact with the truck parking application to reserve a space at the facility. 

Directly providing this information to the driver before they need it may reduce instances where the 

23 Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Smart Roadside Initiative. Available at: http://www.fmcsa.dot.gov/research-and-analysis/technology/smartroadside-initiative (Accessed 4 February, 2015).
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 5

Minnesota Truck Parking 

Information System

With Section 1305 funding through the Safe, 

Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation 

Equity Act: A Legacy for Users, the American 

Transportation Research Institute and the 

Minnesota Department of Transportation jointly 

developed and tested a new system for truck 

parking management. The SmartPark system 

employs an automated network of cameras that 

uses software and vision algorithms to identify 

available parking spaces. Using pixel-level 

information, the system determines the presence 

or absence of a vehicle. Multiple camera views 

are used to identify an available space and create 

a dynamic count of truck parking availability. 

The space availability is then communicated 

through a series of distribution systems, 

including roadside variable message signs 

(VMS), a direct, in-cab data feed and the 

SmartPark4Trucks website. The SmartPark 

system was tested at three public rest stops along 

the I-94 corridor in Minnesota. 

Figure 10. Photo. Variable message sign information 

display from Minnesota SmartPark system.

Source: Minnesota Department of Transportation

driver violates HOS requirements. It may also 

contribute to improved efficiency since drivers 

could travel directly to the parking facility where 

spaces are available (and perhaps even reserved) 

without having to venture off their routes. 

Currently, truck parking is bundled with the 

USDOT Smart Roadside Initiative (SRI).23 For 

the SRI prototype, the following use case is 

outlined for truck parking: 

• The truck is operating on a roadway that 

possesses public and private truck stop 

parking facilities with an installed RealTime Parking Information System. The 

truck’s on-board unit is equipped with an 

application that monitors the driver’s duty 

status and records driver HOS. 

• The truck enters a geo-fenced region that 

automatically exchanges information with 

the truck’s on-board unit, notifying the 

driver that the remaining HOS have reached 

a pre-defined threshold and that there is 

available parking 

at upcoming facilities, designated by exit 

ramp numbers. 

• The truck also maintains a GPS-based 

geo-fenced perimeter. At pre-designated 

distance points, the system automatically 

and wirelessly queries the truck parking 

server for local parking availability. 

• When a truck approaches a facility, the 

system provides a final notification 

regarding availability so that the driver can avoid entering and searching the facility if all 

spaces have been filled. When a truck enters a space, the system reduces the available count 

by one. When a truck exits a space, the system increases the space-available count by one. In 

each case, the central server appropriately modifies the space-available calculation.
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 6

Challenges to Operational Integration 

Although initiatives like C-TIP and FRATIS provide useful platforms for integrating freight data 

and providing relevant information to freight operators, such systems are not widespread. In 

addition, the challenges experienced while building these systems would also apply within an 

ICM context. These projects require accessing information from trucking companies and 

potentially sharing data among multiple companies. Getting these companies to agree to sharing 

the data necessary to make something like C-TIP or FRATIS work could be difficult. 

Furthermore, moving beyond a pilot or prototype stage would likely require the private sector to 

take on the responsibility for system operations and maintenance, which can be a hurdle to 

overcome given competing priorities with respect to operating budgets within these companies.

Another operational challenge is the ability of drivers to actually re-route based on the 

information they are given. For example, an ICM system may recommend re-routing drivers onto 

a parallel arterial to avoid congestion on the freeway. There could be size/weight or cargo 

restrictions on that alternate route, which would add an additional layer of information that needs 

to be incorporated into an ICM system. There could also be “unofficial” hazards to re-routing, 

such as low-hanging tree limbs that could scratch a driver’s vehicle, potentially burdening drivers 

with repair costs. Better understanding what these hazards are would require bringing regular 

drivers of the ICM corridor into early planning discussions. 

Figure 11. Photo. Low-hanging tree limbs create 

“unofficial” hazard on an alternate route.

Figure 12. Photo. Overpass with height restrictions 

can impact alternate route availability. 

Source: E-Squared Engineering

Source: E-Squared Engineering
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 7

The FRATIS program is evaluating freight-specific dynamic routing to overcome some of these 

hurdles. Work in the private sector by firms such as TomTom®, HERE, and ALK® may also be 

leveraged within ICM, as these companies have put a truck-specific spin on real-time navigation, 

including dynamic routing for trucks where constraints such as size, weight, and bridge height 

clearance are accounted for in alternate route recommendation. The cost for these data could 

potentially be split between public sector agencies and private sector freight companies, and the 

ability to purchase the data at a discounted rate could be a significant draw for freight 

stakeholders to collaborate with ICM partners.

In addition to re-routing constraints on the freight side, arterial operating agencies may be 

resistant to re-routing trucks along their roads due to the added congestion and emissions. These 

agencies would need to feel comfortable with the circumstances in which trucks would be guided 

to re-route. It may be helpful to note that if truck drivers along the corridor know of an incident, 

they would re-route anyway; ICM just provides a way for arterial operators to better anticipate 

and manage the added truck traffic when it occurs. 

Lastly, sites may be limited in the freight-specific strategies they are able to apply due to resource 

limitations. ICM agencies must prioritize the most important freight elements to incorporate into 

an approach. Keep in mind that ICM can evolve in a region, and strategies that agencies cannot 

afford to implement immediately may be feasible in the future. Inversely, strategies that were 

initially appropriate may no longer be relevant as conditions change along the corridor.

TECHNICAL INTEGRATION

Once stakeholders are committed and operational integration opportunities are identified and 

prioritized, the final step is technical integration. This provides the means (e.g., communication 

links between agencies, system interfaces, and the associated standards) by which information, 

system operations, and control functions can be effectively shared and distributed among 

network transportation management systems, and by which the impacts of operational decisions 

can be immediately viewed and evaluated by the affected agencies. 

Technical integration involves building a system that facilitates the application of the agreements 

made between the ICM partners. At the Dallas and San Diego demonstration sites, this system 

takes the form of a near real-time decision support system (DSS) that uses multimodal 

information on corridor conditions to analyze and recommend response plans. Building a DSS 

requires integrating information from a range of independently operated, existing systems along 

the corridor. 
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 8

Challenges to Technical Integration

Even if a site does not develop a DSS of the scale and complexity of those developed by Dallas 

and San Diego, any technical ICM system requires a significant amount of data sharing between 

parties. The entities that have been involved in most ICM implementations to date have been 

public sector agencies – State and local DOTs, MPOs, and transit agencies – each of which 

typically operates one or more management systems. By contrast, freight stakeholders are not 

represented by one single agency, and there may be numerous freight providers and management 

systems operating along an ICM corridor of focus. In addition, while public agencies in a region 

may have a history of working together and sharing information from their systems, ICM may be 

the first time freight companies and transportation agencies have worked together.

Freight providers may also vary in the amount and quality of data they collect, and they may use 

different methods for collecting, storing, and formatting that data. Streamlining this information 

for ICM could prove challenging. In addition, as noted above, some providers may be unwilling 

to share their data if they feel it will give their competitors an advantage. If only a few of the 

freight providers along an ICM corridor are willing to share their data, the overall impact of the 

full dataset will be diminished. For example, taking out origin and destination data makes it 

challenging to assess freight flows/routes across a region.

Integrated 

Corridor 

Management

 Decision 

Support 

System

Freeway

Event

Transit

Parking

Express 

Lanes

p

Weather

Traveler 

Info

Arterial

Lane 

Closure

Ramp

Meter

Other

Figure 13. Diagram. Potential integrated corridor management system components.

Source: Federal Highway Administration
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

2 9

Opportunities for Technical Integration 

In addition to the private sector data sources noted above, another solution to the potentially 

spotty nature of freight data along a corridor is the American Transportation Research Institute 

(ATRI) Freight Performance Measures (FPM) Database. The FPM program, developed with 

partial sponsorship from FHWA, uses ATRI-pioneered methods for analyzing real-time and 

archived truck GPS data activity on the Nation’s roadways. Federal, State and local jurisdictions 

use FPM data and analysis for a range of freight planning and operations purposes. Working 

closely with numerous industry partners, ATRI produces measurements and analyses of travel 

speeds, travel times, reliability measures, truck routing and freight flows, and origin/destination 

analyses on road networks through North America. The research is conducted primarily through 

the application of sophisticated and customized geographic information system (GIS) software 

and a unique and substantial truck position database containing travel data from more than 

500,000 commercial trucks throughout North America. 

Among the FPM applications and tools that could play a role in ICM are:

• Weather/Incident Delay Impacts – Real-time weather information and truck impacts can 

be monitored, and the driver can be contacted in advance of the impact with likely delay 

times and truck parking or alternative route options.

• Truck Parking Analyses – FPM data can be used to identify where trucks are stopped for 

an extended period of time and identify whether the area is a truck parking facility, or if not, 

determine which sites in the area are in need of a truck parking facility.

• Freight Origin/Destination Analyses – Using the unique truck identifiers contained in the 

FPM data, it becomes possible to analyze macro freight flows as well as where truck trips 

originate and where the final trip/freight destination is anywhere in North America.

• Intermodal/Port Connector Assessments – Similar to the freight origin/destination 

analyses, intermodal and port-to-port freight movements can be assessed using the same 

unique truck identifiers in the FPM data.

• Identification of Truck Congestion Points and Bottlenecks – Every year, ATRI uses FPM 

data to perform a nationwide analysis of 250 freight-specific bottlenecks that are the result 

of heavy congestion delays.

INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

3 1

CONCLUSION 

Integrated corridor managment (ICM) is the next logical step in transportation operations. As 

congestion continues to grow, and agencies’ ability to expand the roadway network is limited by 

both space and resources, ICM provides operators with a tool to maximize the capacity of 

existing roadway infrastructure through multi-modal, active management of all assets along a 

corridor. 

ICM is about moving transportation system users along a corridor as efficiently as possible, and 

the freight industry constitutes an important user group. Freight transportation is a critical 

component of our Nation’s economy, and ICM has the potential to improve freight mobility 

throughout our major urban corridors. This can be achieved through advanced, freight-specific 

traveler information that allows freight companies to avoid congestion and make better planning 

and routing decisions. In addition, ICM offers a platform for public sector and freight 

stakeholders to explore potential operational strategies to improve freight travel along a corridor, 

such as freight signal priority and parking guidance. 

There are ample opportunities to integrate freight into an ICM approach. ICM project teams can 

take advantage of existing groups for collaboration with freight stakeholders. In addition, ITS 

efforts like Cross-Town Improvement Project and Freight Advanced Traveler Information System 

provide useful models for integrating freight data and providing useful freight-specific traveler 

information. However, while these opportunities show promise, there are many barriers to 

overcome in order to successfully include freight in an ICM approach. The freight industry 

includes multiple stakeholders with competing business interests. In addition, ICM requires a 

significant amount of data, and freight data may be limited in many regions. Where those data 

are available, it could be difficult to collect due to privacy concerns. 

Despite these hurdles, the benefits of integrating ICM and freight can yield a payoff that 

minimizes the impact of the challenges. As more regions begin to explore an ICM concept for 

their region, they should think of how to engage this critical stakeholder group. In turn, freight 

stakeholders should consider how they could benefit from involvement in an ICM project. 

Ultimately, integration can help further the shared vision of both public sector agencies and the 

freight industry for an efficient and reliable travel experience.

INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

3 3

APPENDIX. STATE TRUCKING ASSOCIATION WEBSITES 

ASSOCIATION WEB ADDRESS

Alabama Trucking Association, Inc. alabamatrucking.org

Alaska Trucking Association, Inc. aktrucks.org

Arizona Trucking Association arizonatrucking.com

Arkansas Trucking Association arkansastrucking.com

California Trucking Association caltrux.org

Colorado Motor Carriers Association cmca.com

Delaware Motor Transport Association, Inc. N/A

Florida Trucking Association, Inc. fltrucking.org

Georgia Motor Trucking Association, Inc. gmta.org

Hawaii Transportation Association htahawaii.org

Idaho Trucking Association idtrucking.org

Illinois Trucking Association, Inc. iltrucking.com

Indiana Motor Truck Association, Inc. intrucking.org

Iowa Motor Truck Association, Inc. iowamotortruck.com

Kansas Motor Carriers Association kmca.org

Kentucky Motor Transport Assoc., Inc. kmta.net

Louisiana Motor Transport Association, Inc. louisianatrucking.com

Maine Motor Transport Association, Inc. mmta.com

Maryland Motor Truck Association, Inc. mmtanet.com

Massachusetts Motor Transp. Association, Inc. mass-trucking.org

Michigan Trucking Association, Inc. mitrucking.org

Minnesota Trucking Association mntruck.org

Mississippi Trucking Association mstrucking.org

Missouri Trucking Association motrucking.org

Motor Carriers of Montana mttrucking.org
INTEGRATED CORRIDOR MANAGEMENT AND FREIGHT OPPORTUNITIES

3 4

ASSOCIATION WEB ADDRESS

Motor Transport Association of CT, Inc. mtac.us

Nebraska Trucking Association nebtrucking.com

Nevada Trucking Association, Inc. nevadatrucking.com

New Hampshire Motor Transport Association nhmta.org

New Jersey Motor Truck Association njmta.org

New Mexico Trucking Association nmtrucking.org

New York State Motor Truck Association nytrucks.org

North Carolina Trucking Association, Inc. nctrucking.com

North Dakota Motor Carriers Association, Inc. ndmca.org

Ohio Trucking Association ohiotrucking.org

Oklahoma Trucking Association oktrucking.org

Oregon Trucking Associations, Inc. ortrucking.org

Pennsylvania Motor Truck Association pmta.org

Rhode Island Trucking Association, Inc. ritrucking.org

South Carolina Trucking Association, Inc. sctrucking.org

South Dakota Trucking Association southdakotatrucking.com

Tennessee Trucking Association tntrucking.org

Texas Trucking Association texastrucking.com

Utah Trucking Association utahtrucking.com

Vermont Truck and Bus Association, Inc. vtba.org

Virginia Trucking Association vatrucking.org

Washington Trucking Associations wtatrucking.com

West Virginia Trucking Association, Inc. wvtrucking.com

Wisconsin Motor Carriers Association witruck.org

Wyoming Trucking Association, Inc. wytruck.org

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Highway Administration 

Office of Operations 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, DC 20590 

Toll-Free “Help Line” 866-367-7487

www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov

December 2015

FHWA-HOP-15-018