Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels

Free download. Book file PDF easily for everyone and every device. You can download and read online Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels file PDF Book only if you are registered here. And also you can download or read online all Book PDF file that related with Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels book. Happy reading Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels Bookeveryone. Download file Free Book PDF Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels at Complete PDF Library. This Book have some digital formats such us :paperbook, ebook, kindle, epub, fb2 and another formats. Here is The CompletePDF Book Library. It's free to register here to get Book file PDF Inland navigation : locks, dams, and channels Pocket Guide.

Seller Inventory B Condition: Brand New. In Stock. Seller Inventory zk Never used!. Seller Inventory P Ships with Tracking Number! Buy with confidence, excellent customer service!. Seller Inventory n. Seller Inventory NEW Publisher: Amer Society of Civil Engineers , This specific ISBN edition is currently not available.

View all copies of this ISBN edition:. Synopsis Provides guidance in the planning, design, construction, and operation of shallow-draft waterways, discussing factors that should be considered and solutions that have been successful in avoiding or eliminating undesirable conditions. Buy New Learn more about this copy. Customers who bought this item also bought.

Stock Image. Inland Navigation Bruce McCartney. Published by American Society of Civil Engineers New Quantity Available: 5. Seller Rating:. New Paperback Quantity Available: 1. Published by American Society of Civil Engineers. Published by Amer Society of Civil Engineers Table shows the commodity flow on the entire Ohio River system, which includes the Ohio mainstem and its tributaries. Coal is the dominant commodity on the system, making up 59 percent of the tonnage in Most is steam coal, which moves both inbound and outbound on the system.

Coal mines in Appalachia send coal to the river via conveyor belt, truck, and rail for shipment to river-located electric power generation plants. Those power plants also receive upbound coal from other sources, and there is still considerable movement of metallurgical coal on the Ohio and its tributaries. The second-ranked commodity group, crude materials nearly 22 percent of the total , consists primarily of sand, gravel, and limestone.

As a practical matter, the large quantities of coal and crude materials moving on the Ohio could not easily be diverted to rail. Coal alone would require the railroads to handle more than 1 million additional carloads annually and to provide in excess of 26 more train movements per day Kruse et al. Furthermore, most of the shipping and receiving facilities for this traffic are designed and operated specifically to handle barge shipments.

Thus, as was the case for the Upper Mississippi, rail, truck, pipeline, and conveyor belts are complementary to water transport. The total distance is 1, miles, and the maintained minimum channel depth is 12 feet. The system includes 10 locks, which serve a variety of purposes. The lock is currently one of the most congested on the entire inland waterways system. Together they made up Crude materials ranked third, at nearly 15 percent.

Pipelines are the main competing and complementary mode, but the circumstances of individual plant locations and outputs defy any easy generalizations. The Illinois has a minimum maintained channel depth of 9 feet and seven lock sites with single chambers feet long by feet wide. These dimensions require the typical tow of 15 jumbo barges to double lock, and the lack of auxiliary chambers means that any lock outage will shut down navigation. The Illinois is a typical moderate-use waterway.

It moved 31 million tons in The commodity mix was similar to that on the Mississippi, but with a smaller proportion of coal and a greater proportion of petroleum and chemicals. The Columbia River has the longest inland navigation channel on the U. West Coast. The Columbia provides a shallow draft waterway foot depth from Kennewick, Washington, to Vancouver, Washington, and Portland, Oregon, a distance of approximately miles. There are four navigation dams on the shallow draft section. Agriculture dominates flows on the Columbia.

Food and farm products constituted 53 percent of the tonnage in About 76 percent of these agricultural products were grain and soybeans shipped for export. The Columbia River is the top gateway for U. It accounts for about 16 percent of all food and farm products moved on the inland waterways and about 3 percent of all food and farm imports and exports. Crude materials, largely forest products and sand and gravel, made up another 20 percent of the tonnage.

The river also plays an important role in distribution of petroleum products throughout the region.

  • Essential Tools for Organisational Performance: Tools, Models and Approaches for Managers and Consultants.
  • Family Therapy with Suicidal Adolescents.

There are rail lines along both the north and the south shores of the Columbia River. They are running at or near capacity, with much of that capacity devoted to serving the intermodal container trade. As shown in Table , the principal commodities carried on inland waterways system corridors are coal, petroleum and petroleum products, food and farm products, chemicals and related products, crude materials, manufactured goods, and manufactured equipment.

Examination of annual commodity trends for several of the chief commodities on most of the primary corridors during the period to indicates adequate capacity in the system. Aside from petroleum products moving on the Lower Mississippi, commodity movement appears to be stable or declining for more than a decade for most corridor segments. In view of the volume that can be moved by one barge being equal to the payloads of many trucks, state officials have expressed concern about the consequences of massive numbers of heavy trucks replacing shipments that had moved by water for highway congestion and pavement and bridge infrastructure.

Figure shows a map of inland waterways lock infrastructure by original construction date. Figure shows the average age of lock and dam infrastructure in comparison with other federal and state infrastructure and transportation assets. The average age of the locks in was less than 10 years; in the average age of the locks was about 30 years whether or not major rehabilitation work was considered ; in the average age was 59 years. After rehabilitation is accounted for, in more than 50 percent of the locks were more than 50 years old.

Lost transportation time due to delays and lock unavailability outages is a cost to shippers and an important consideration in deciding on future investments. Systemwide, about 80 percent of lost transportation time is attributable to delays. On average, 49 percent of tows in were delayed across the 10 highest-tonnage locks, with an average length of tow delay of 3. Some delay is expected for routine maintenance, weather, accidents, and other reasons, but delays can be affected by maintenance outages caused by decreases in the reliability of aging machinery or infrastructure.

Most lost service due to delay occurs at high-demand locks used for agricultural exports and so may be caused by congestion related to peaks in seasonal shipping. Data are not available to explain the causes of delay at locks, which makes up 80 percent of lost transportation hours. Delays might be attributable to seasonal peak volumes due to weather, harvest, under-capacity, or other causes. Some high-use locks are located on waterways designated as low or moderate use, which has implications for how to allocate funds across parts of the system.

This situation can occur because of seasonal peaks in the movement of certain commodities, such as harvested food and farm products, or from navigation closures caused by annually recurring weather conditions, such as ice or flooding. The tonnage moved through each lock during peak demand periods, as well as the type and value of the cargo, could be considered in funding allocations instead of considering only average annual waterway ton-miles. Likewise, some rivers and waterborne corridors may move as much or more tonnage on a seasonal basis as rivers classified as high use but receive low-use classification on the basis of annual ton-miles of transport rather than seasonal peak ton-miles.

The advanced age of lock and dam infrastructure is often used to communicate funding needs for the system. Age is not a good indicator of lock condition. A substantial number of locks have been rehabilitated, which would be expected to restore performance to its original condition if not better.

Lock (water navigation) - Wikipedia

Dating the age of assets from the time of the last major rehabilitation, as is done for highway infrastructure such as bridges, would be more accurate. Furthermore, with some exceptions, little correlation exists between the age of locks and their performance as measured by delay experienced by system users. A more useful approach for targeting funds to improve system performance than focusing on age as a proxy for lock functioning would be to identify waterway segments and facilities where the lost time due to delay based on millions of tons delayed is substantially higher than the system average.

The inland waterways infrastructure is managed by the U.

USACE, under its Civil Works Program headed by the Assistant Secretary for Civil Works, plans, constructs, operates, and maintains a large water resources infrastructure that includes locks and dams for inland navigation; maintenance of harbor channel depths; dams, levees, and coastal barriers for flood risk management; hydropower generation facilities; and recreation.

The primary USACE Civil Works mission areas are support of navigation for freight transportation and public safety; reduction of flood and storm damage; and protection and restoration of aquatic ecosystems, such as the rebuilding of wetlands and the performance of environmental mitigation for USACE facilities.

Freely available

Hydropower generation is an important activity of USACE, although it has not been considered a primary mission. Other USACE responsibilities include recreation, maintenance of water supply infrastructure municipal water and wastewater facilitates , and disaster relief and remediation beyond flood disaster relief e. Whereas some federal agencies have broad authorities, Congress authorizes each capital investment for capacity expansion, facility replacement, or major rehabilitation of USACE water infrastructure projects.

A construction project generally originates with a request to a congressional office from communities, businesses or other organizations, and state and local governments for federal assistance. Benefit—cost analysis is the primary criterion used in selecting capital expenditures projects for funding. Projects that pass a minimum threshold for determining that the benefit exceeds the cost are eligible for congressional authorization and funding.

Two types of congressional authorizations are required for a construction project—one for investigation and one for project implementation. Study results also are submitted to the executive office of the Office of Management and Budget OMB , which applies its own fiscal, benefit—cost, and other criteria to assess whether projects warrant funding according to executive branch objectives. Thus, both the projects selected for initial study and the project authorizations are at the discretion of Congress. After Congress authorizes a project, it becomes eligible to receive implementation funding in annual Energy and Water Development appropriations acts.

Even if an authorized project has received initial construction funding, there is no assurance that it will receive sufficient appropriations each year to provide for an efficient construction schedule. The actual funding for the project over its life cycle may be much less suitable. Divisions prioritize projects across their districts and provide division-wide rankings of projects to USACE headquarters.

USACE headquarters considers division priorities and rankings, administration budget priorities, and other factors in ranking requests. The local assessment of assets and maintenance needs follows general guidelines, but it has many local variations. Major rehabilitation projects meet the following criteria established in a series of Water Resources Development Acts from to Includes economically justified structural work for restoration of a major project feature that extends the life of the feature significantly or enhances operational efficiency.

Requires a minimum of 2 fiscal years to complete. These thresholds are adjusted annually by regulation and are subject to negotiation. Major rehabilitation projects are treated as capital projects for new construction in the budgeting process instead of being considered an expense of maintaining the system. Cost-Sharing Rules Before , the inland navigation system was funded almost entirely through general revenues collected from taxpayers. Congress transformed funding for the inland waterways by passing two pieces of legislation: the Inland Waterways Revenue Act of and the Water Resources Development Act of , which created the funding framework followed today.

This legislation established a tax on diesel fuel for commercial vessels paid by the barge industry and an Inland Waterways Trust Fund IWTF to pay for construction with fuel tax revenues.

Lock (water navigation)

It also increased the nonfederal cost-sharing requirements for inland navigation construction projects. The waiving or adjustment of cost-sharing requirements for individual projects is infrequent and typically requires authorization by Congress. The federal share for commercial navigation is paid via general revenues. The federal share depends on the type of water resource project see Table For many project types e. Furthermore, inland waterways feasibility studies to determine the eligibility of a navigation project for funding are entirely a federal expense; in contrast, for deepwater navigation and nonnavigation projects, the federal share for feasibility studies is 50 percent.

The balance of the IWTF, which is used to pay 50 percent of construction costs, has declined. The balance fell sharply between and as expenditures for inland waterways exceeded fuel tax collections and interest on the trust fund balance. Reasons for the decline include increased appropriations, lower fuel tax revenues than in previous years, large construction costs, and construction cost overruns.

Capital projects are funded incrementally by Congress through the annual budgeting and appropriations process. Incremental federal funding, an increasingly common procedure in which only a portion of the total budget for a project is appropriated, contributes to project delivery delays and higher costs NRC ; NRC , 29, gives another example on the Lower Monongahela River. A substantial number of water resources projects that have been authorized by Congress via WRDA remain unfunded through the appropriations process.

These projects are known as the. Congress considers the recommendations of USACE and OMB, but the selection of waterways projects for authorization has a long history of being driven largely by political and local concerns Ferejohn While concerns about the backlog have been expressed, its size is not a reliable indicator of the funding needed for the inland navigation system for at least three reasons.

With the aging of the system, maintenance has become a higher priority. Third, not all of the projects in the navigation backlog are priorities. In contrast to its practice for other modes, Congress authorizes and appropriates funds on a project-by-project basis. Benefit—cost analysis is used to determine whether a construction projects meets a minimum threshold of eligibility for pursuing authorization and appropriations and is generally suitable for this purpose,16 but the lack of a prioritization process based on a formal assessment of system needs has resulted in the authorization of more projects than can be funded within the constraints of the budget.

Because more projects are authorized than can be funded, priorities are sorted out in the budgeting and appropriations process, in which both the executive branch and Congress participate. IWUB, as part of a capital projects business. For these reasons, a method for prioritizing projects on the basis of the service needs of the system may be more useful than an attempt to estimate and seek funding for the entire backlog. Prioritization is discussed in Chapter 4.

A number of temporary measures have been. States and private enterprise led the initial building of inland waterways infrastructure and charged for use of the waterways. Federal involvement in the inland waterways system began in the 18th century, when the scope and scale of inland waterways projects grew beyond what any private entity or state could or would take on, especially without the ability to realize a monetary return on investment. Congress made these federal investments to promote inland waterways commerce, which was central to the economic development of the United States.

This history has led to a unique federal role in the inland waterways system among all the freight transportation modes. Federal management and decision-making responsibilities for freight transportation generally are fragmented across jurisdictional lines in Congress, multiple federal agencies, and different silos of funding. Coast Guard part of the Department of Homeland Security manage the marine and inland waterways systems, the U. Department of Transportation has responsibilities for highway, aviation, rail, and pipeline.

Various congressional committees are responsible for authorizations and appropriations for the different modes. Decisions about inland waterways investments, including ports, channels, and infrastructure, are made largely at the federal level. However, most decisions about highway investments are made at the state and metropolitan levels. For ports, investment decisions are made mainly by independent private entities and sometimes by state or bi-state port authorities. As private transport industries, railroads and pipelines make their own decisions about investments. Public and private shares of funding also differ across modes.

Highways, aviation, ports harbor and channel dredging and maintenance , and the inland waterways all receive federal aid for capital costs. Rail and pipeline, with which the inland waterways system competes to some degree, are almost entirely private enterprises, with minimal federal assistance for infrastructure.

For the inland waterways system, federal support is used to cover a large shortfall between the fees paid by users and total system costs. This compares with virtually no federal general revenue support for rail system users and pipeline, and historically only about 25 percent federal support for highways, which are primarily derived from user fees. Federal subsidies for the various freight modes are complicated and contested among advocates for the modes, in part because of disagreements about a direct subsidies that are funded by various public sources and b indirect subsidies that result from costs imposed on the public externalities that are not part of market transactions between shippers and carriers.

No authoritative study has estimated either direct or indirect subsidies across the various freight modes, although a previous Transportation Research Board study TRB developed and pilot-tested a methodology for estimating freight external costs. Assessing direct subsidies is more straightforward among the modes with which water competes rail, pipeline, and, to a much lesser degree, trucking. Freight railroads are private entities that fund the vast bulk of their operations and capital and maintenance spending from their own funds. Limited federal funds are available for grade separation projects to separate traffic for safety and mobility , a modest federal loan guarantee program is available principally for short lines , and state governments occasionally provide public funding for such purposes as raising bridges or tunnels for double-stack trains or to improve rail access to state ports.

Because pipelines are entirely private, the evaluation of subsidies is easier than for rail.

Join WCI Today

Although long-distance truck—barge competition is unlikely because of the much higher cost of truck movements per ton-mile, there may be short segments in which truck and barge would compete. The trucking assessment of competitive subsidies is most complex because trucks use highways that are shared with passengers. Although both freight and passenger operators pay fuel taxes and other user fees, there is continued debate about whether the largest and heaviest trucks pay their share of the costs of building and maintaining highways GAO Moreover, after decades of relying almost exclusively on federal and state user fees to fund interstate and intercity highways, in the past decade Congress has used general funds to supplement user fee revenues to the Highway Trust Fund HTF for the federal share of highway capital spending CBO Improved fuel economy and political opposition to raising fuel taxes have resulted in insufficient user fees into the HTF to pay for the federal share of highway capital improvements.

Whereas trucks can serve almost all O-D pairs because of the ubiquity of roads and highways, and railroads reach many OD pairs as well, waterways are far more limited. The structures locks and dams built and maintained for freight transportation have resulted in beneficiaries beyond commercial navigation. It is reasonable and, from an economic perspective, potentially efficiency enhancing to consider whether these beneficiaries could help pay for the system.

The sections below assess the available evidence on benefits of the inland waterways used for freight transportation and the economic and practical considerations in charging for the benefits received. Commercial navigation is the primary beneficiary of the inland waterways system. Benefits beyond commercial navigation may include hydropower generation, recreation, flood damage avoidance, municipal water supply, irrigation, higher property values for property owners, sewage assimilation, mosquito control, lower consumer costs because the availability of barge shipping may result in more competitive railroad pricing referred to as water-compelled rates , and environmental benefits associated with lower fuel emissions of barge compared with other modes.

Whether barge or rail is the more energy-efficient mode measured as fuel use per ton-mile depends in large part on the water. The total federal share of the cost of the inland waterways system is estimated to be about 90 percent TRB The federal share is roughly 25 percent for the highways used by motor carriers and 0 percent for pipelines and nearly so for railroads both private industries for which the federal role is primarily one of safety and environmental regulation. Examination of whether beneficiaries could help pay for the system is rational and would improve economic efficiency.

Commercial navigation beneficiaries are a viable option, since commercial carriers impose significant marginal costs. A benefit—cost analysis prepared by USACE is the primary source of technical information that Congress uses during the authorization process in deciding when spending is justified for capital projects. While benefit—cost analyses have been used for determining whether a project meets a minimum threshold for funding, they have not been used to rank projects, and the result has been far more projects being authorized than can be afforded within the constraints of the budget.

A method for prioritizing projects on the basis of the service needs of the system would be more useful than an attempt to estimate and seek funding for the existing backlog. The main cost of providing these conditions is the maintenance of lock and dam infrastructure, but the maintenance of channels and pools is part of the cost. USACE has developed a conceptual framework described in more detail below that considers the age of infrastructure and other elements consistent with EEAM to prioritize repairs that would cost-effectively extend the life of an asset or critical component of the asset and achieve a reliable navigation system.

The elements include the probability of failure of the infrastructure; infrastructure usage demand , defined as whether the waterway has low, moderate, or high levels of freight traffic; and the economic consequences of failure to shippers and carriers. This approach recognizes the importance of economic consequences for strategic investment instead of assuming that all navigation infrastructure needs to be maintained at its original condition. For USACE, the goal of prioritizing investments is to produce the greatest national economic development benefit, which for commercial navigation has meant maximizing reductions in the cost of cargo transported by using USACE waterway infrastructure.

Freely available

In practical terms, this means reducing the risk of physical failure and maintaining a target level of delays. Although the specific procedures of the approach are just beginning to be implemented and refined and often are not clear, the framework is being applied at program, district, and headquarters levels to guide the identification of maintenance needs and funding requests.

USACE intends to use the framework to implement a standardized assessment of assets across the system outcomes-based assessment. The assessment is planned to cover all important aspects of asset management. However, USACE has not fully developed a set of measures or a standard methodology for assessing risk across all assets in the inland waterways system.

Additional considerations that would need attention are described in the section of this chapter on implementation. A standard process is lacking for assessing the ability of the inland waterways system to meet demand for commercial navigation service and for prioritizing spending for maintenance and repairs. An asset management program focused on economic efficiency, fully implemented and linked to the budgeting process, would prioritize maintenance spending and ascertain the funding levels required for reliable freight service.

A well-executed program of asset management would promote rational and data-driven investment decisions based on system needs and minimize the broader influences that affect the budgeting process. USACE has adopted a generally appropriate framework for asset management that is mostly consistent with EEAM, but it is not yet fully developed or deployed across districts. The framework recognizes the importance of economic consequences for strategic investments and does not assume, as in the past, that all navigation infrastructure needs to be maintained at its original condition.

The approach appropriately includes assessment of three main elements that follow from EEAM: the probability of failure of the infrastructure; infrastructure usage demand , defined as whether the waterway has low, moderate, or high levels of freight traffic; and the economic consequences of failure to shippers and carriers.

This chapter discusses funding options for the inland waterways commercial navigation system other than reliance for the most part on federal general revenues. The immediate users of the inland waterways are the companies operating the barge tows that move commercial freight. They are the focus of this chapter. However, the burden of payments by the barge industry is not borne fully by the operators, and they do not enjoy all the benefits. The industries that use barge shipping benefit from the low cost of shipping their products, mostly commodities that are low in value relative to their weight such as coal, petroleum and petroleum products, food and farm products, chemicals and related products, crude materials, and to a lesser degree manufactured goods and equipment.