ERWG_(Carrier_meeting)_17May17-Mike.pptx

Emergency Route Working Group (ERWG)

Mike Frego FEMA Transportation Management May 17, 2017

Good morning, I’m John Anderson from FEMA Transportation. I’d like to convey my appreciation to USNORTHCOM for the opportunity to share insights on FEMA’s activities for improving the transportation enterprise during both steady state and contingency operations.

5/15/2017

Agenda ERWG Authority, Scope, Objectives

Utilities/Industry Perspective

FEMA Perspective

ERWG Strawman Solutions

ERWG Authority The Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (P.L. 114-94, 129 Stat. 1312) requires the Secretary of Transportation to establish a working group to determine best practices for expeditious State approval of special permits for vehicles involved in emergency response and recovery.

The ERWG is established under the authority of section 5502 of the Fixing America's Surface Transportation (FAST) Act (Public Law 114-94). The ERWG is also being established in accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), as amended, 5 U.S.C. App. 2.

ERWG Objectives

The ERWG shall provide the Secretary of Transportation, through the Administrator of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), with advice and recommendations for the implementation of best practices for expeditious State approval of special permits for vehicles involved in emergency response and recovery.

The ERWG's advice and recommendations will work within existing legal authorities and not require changes in State or Federal law for DOT to implement.

ERWG Scope

In determining best practices, the ERWG shall consider whether:

Impediments currently exist that prevent expeditious State approval of special permits for vehicles involved in emergency response and recovery;

It is possible to pre-identify and establish emergency routes between States through which infrastructure repair materials could be delivered following a natural disaster or emergency;

A State could pre-designate an emergency route identified as a certified emergency route if a motor vehicle that exceeds the otherwise applicable Federal and State truck length or width limits may safely operate along such route during periods of declared emergency and recovery from such periods; and An online map could be created to identify each pre-designated emergency route under paragraph (c), including information on specific limitations, obligations, and notification requirements along that route.

Industry/Utilities Perspective Focus has been on response provided by utility consortiums Difficulty transiting across state lines without International Registration Plan (IRP) or International Fuel tax Agreement (IFTA) - unnecessary fees/costs Oversize/overweight standards different per state No standard process to issue waiver/permits “Pass through” states Information dissemination to local authorities

FEMA Perspective

Look at all factors that can promote or inhibit movement during emergencies.

Dual hat approach – moving FEMA “stuff” and supporting Interagency response Waivers for overweight axles on trucks pulling from DCs Ensuring the designated emergency routes connect to strategic air and sea ports Identifying emergency routes for OCONUS locations Assistance to get 24 hour access to waiver authorities for MHU/THU movements Controlling flow of resources on emergency routes Ensuring retrograde movements receive the same waivers as deployments International assistance (i.e. Canada)

Problem Statements:

Standard sized vehicles that do not typically travel interstate require special IFTA and IRP trip permits. Oversized vehicles also require permits from each state that they travel through.

Utilities and others may have difficulty obtaining these permits in a timely fashion. Delays also occur at inspection sites.

Current permitting and waiver processes are not adequate for routing of oversize and overweight vehicle Recommendations:

Create an emergency route network that can be used by vehicles with an emergency permit. This expedited emergency permit would cover IFTA, IRP and oversized vehicles.

Develop a multi-tier routing system housed on a Federal website, but maintained by States with input from local entities.

Implementation Approach Key Actors and Roles States voluntarily join an Emergency Route Compact FHWA provides funding for coordinating a pilot program Specific Steps for Implementation FHWA established pilot program with contiguous States to develop routing network with multiple level roads States define a two level network – Level 1 network for standard “legal” vehicles, Level 2 for over-dimensional Route activated with declared emergency (could occur prior with coordination) State issues an executive order allowing the state DOT to issue emergency permits (similar to what Florida has done) Each state DOT then issues a single blanket online emergency permit that provides emergency permits for IRP, IFTA and minimally oversize vehicles responding to an emergency.

States set up an emergency communication system to inform enforcement when loads will be passing through States agree to expedite the movement of vehicles through inspection stations

Implementation Approach Timeline 3 months to identify interested states 6 months to agree to voluntary compact 3 months to implement compact Outstanding Issues for Implementation Harmonize actions between states – i.e. 30 states have auto issue; 20 do not Fed DOT guidance on dimensional restrictions; will not touch weight waivers Developing vehicle envelope (max L, W, H) for each route level Map development and maintenance Streamlining Enforcement – weigh stations Emergency communications Definition and identification of emergency and response vehicles Length of time Emergency Route designation in effect – before, during, after image13.jpg image14.jpg image15.png image16.jpeg image6.png image7.emf image8.jpeg image9.png image10.png image11.jpeg image12.png image2.png image3.png image17.jpeg image1.jpeg