NCHRP 20-59(14)C

Strategic Plan Implementation Support for the AASHTO Special

Committee on Transportation Security and Emergency

Management (SCOTSEM)

“BUILDING A RESILIENT

TRANSPORTATION NETWORK”

SCOTSEM ANNUAL MEETING

August 21-25, 2016

Tucson, Arizona

SUMMARY REPORT

GPC, Inc. DS Ekern Consulting

PO Box 40483 PO Box 907

Albuquerque, NM 87196 Biwabik, MN 55708

ii

Revision history

Version Author Reviewer Date

1.0 D. Fletcher, D. Ekern 9/6/2016

iii

Preface

Cosponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO),

Arizona Department of Transportation (ADOT), Transportation Research Board (TRB), Battelle Inc., MH

Corbin, LLC, Countermeasures Assessment & Security Experts, LLC and Digital Traffic Systems, Inc. the

2016 SCOTSEM Annual Meeting provided the opportunity for SCOTSEM members and Leadership Team,

NCHRP Panel 20-59(14)C, industry professionals, and other attendees to exchange information and

participate in accredited training activities.

80+ professionals and administrators representing 29 states, 3 federal agencies, several private sector

companies attended the event. A participant roster is included as Appendix A.

This Summary Report summarizes key information and trends collected and reported by attendees.

Reports from the 2015, 2014, and 2013 SCOTSEM Meetings are also available from AASHTO and posted

on the SCOTSEM and NOCoE Websites.

iv

Contents

Preface ........................................................................................................................................................iii

SECTION I- PARTICIPANT and OBSERVER REPORTED, OBSERVATIONS and TRENDS from SELECTED

SESSIONS throughout the MEETING ............................................................................................................ 1

SECTION II – POTENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN FUTURE MEETING PLANNING ............................................ 7

1

SECTION I- PARTICIPANT and OBSERVER REPORTED OBSERVATIONS

and TRENDS from SELECTED SESSIONS throughout the MEETING

This year’s meeting incorporated for the first time a new attendee/new to the business

orientation session to assist in helping professionals become acquainted with the resources

available to them. A copy of the orientation briefing is attached in Appendix B.

Selected learning and conclusions from selected sessions.

PLENARY SESSION

- Department of Homeland Security

o Transportation Emergency fact sheets (TERFs) available at dot.gov/emergency

o Working on DOT map (GIS-based field mobile app)

o DOT emergency website redesign will be complete by the end of 2016

o White House is sponsoring a resilience roundtable in Sept ‘16

- AASHTO

o Proposed name change for SCOTSEM is “Transportation Security and Resilience”

o Final AASHTO COMMITTEE REORGANIZATION will be announced in Fall 2016

o Proposed high level structure reinforces lack of strategic partnership BETWEEN

SCOTSEM and bridges and structures committees

- Participant reactions to the Reorganization were gathered later in the meeting but are

reported here for continuity:

o Fear that the focus on security/EM will be lost under proposed reorganization

o Consensus opposition to proposed change by many DOT representatives

o Why is AASHTO elevating resilience/EM at the same time that many DOTs are

shrinking its role and visibility?

o Is there a model org chart w/ roles & responsibilities for resilience-focused

offices or functions?

SELECTED BREAKOUT INFORMATION

FIRST RESPONDER COLLABORATIONS

Dan Monteleone, ALASKA DOT – (AK) DOT/PF

AK is really BIG. Many places cannot be reached by wheeled vehicle. Air and water are equally

or more important. AK has 260 airports. Marine highway system is the largest in the US. Federal

Protective Security Advisor (FRSA) – advises on hardening areas.

2

Questions:

Q: Where does AK Railway fit in?

A: AK Commissioner sits on Railway board, giving continuity. Work in tandem with rail. Rail is the

most critical mode for moving freight, fuel and goods in the state. Not part of AKDOT/PF.

Q: How much do you work with Emergency Management?

A: Pretty regularly; once a month if we do not have an event or a drill.

Q: What challenges are there in having the state capitol isolated from the rest of the state?

A: A little inconvenient in terms of low access to legislative body; budgeting issues; and travel

costs to visit with legislative representatives.

Q: Do the agencies own a lot of aircraft?

A: Public safety owns the most; DOT leases all of its aircraft.

Tom Vanderpool, Indiana DOT: Full Scale Exercises

Indiana trains to the worst-case scenario, the Wabash-New Madrid fault line. It is a significant,

major fault and is due to “go off.” The Vincennes District has all of the fault lines and would be

expected to be nonfunctional in a major event, so each of the other districts is expected to step

up in such a case.

INDOT uses snowplows to clear the roads, so that ambulance and rescue could get through. No

crew cabs.

Program has grown every year; DHS has participated; Ohio DOT will participate this year.

Moving toward the utilization of data to construct GIS maps showing damage extent, rather

than just a pile of reports to go by.

Lessons

Importance of Mobilization Site procedures

Never simulate mobilization – train as you fight, fight as you train.

Someone must watch the space between snowplow blade and tires.

Don’t use 3 as a crew size. Crew size is situation dependent.

Use compacted Ag as a ballast; can function as temporary patch material.

Should have sling/chain to allow pulling apart if too big to push.

Develop statewide standard night movement signals.

Night training.

Use of hand held radios.

Vehicle inspection markings – we’re using orange tape for this. . .

How to handle/ deal with fatalities found along routes.

Cones and Road Closed signs for Level II if needed to close a road.

3

Train as you’ll fight! Mobilize forces at home, convoy to the exercise location, and spend the two nights at the Unit Site utilizing cots & MREs, play hard, learn a lot, then convoy home.

Description Day-by-Day of a deployment: TF includes local and county police; fire and rescue; DHS and DOT among others. Hoosier Helpers; HAM Operators. 150-200 employees participate in drills every year.

Sept 19 arrive; Sept 20 group 1; Sept 22 group 2. Training Facility is an active military base.

Lorenzo Parra: MA DOT: Training and Drills

Program has been in place for 10 years. Metro system is primary focus. Cyclical

Emergency Management program. Many bridges and tunnels in the Metro Boston area,

deemed critical to the nations’ economy.

Partners: Transit; Fire and Police; Port Authority; Mass emergency management

authority; transit police; convention authority

FAST First Action Simulations Test Workshops

CITE Communications Incident Tunnel Exercise

Many exercises start out as tabletop exercises, then graduate to functional, then to full-

scale exercises over a period of several years.

Real-world events also provide opportunities to learn

All training includes all first responder agencies.

Questions

Q: when closing tunnels, when do you close?

A: 10pm, exercise begins at 12 am

Q: understanding about these closures, or is there pushback?

A: Public understands; we have closures almost every weekend for maintenance. We try to

communicate but do not always succeed, so occasionally the public has some issues.

PLANNED EVENT SECURITY CASE STUDIES

PowerPoint for this Session in Appendix C

CALTRANS - Toll Bridge SB-50 Lessons Learned

The idea was to take mobile command center and move it to southern bridge. Setup a base camp. Have a tailgate party. And have a reserve force if needed. Then reality struck in December. Super Bowl City. What is that? They wanted to turn the ferry building in San Francisco into Super Bowl City. This was called the 480 Route before the earthquake. A bridge controls access to this location. It was supposed to last for 8 days.

4

The solution was ICS: Area Command. Reached out to highway patrol, fire, all with preexisting relationships. What was the battle plan for San Francisco? There was none. 20K people a day going to and from. There was no mgt. plan, no emergency plan, and no con ops. Quick Reaction Force – regular staff and additional staff that could be redirected. Sustained Ops

- Ops period 0800-2000 - 9 day cycle - Tow service QRF - Command Group

This was a sanctuary for homeless. The city moved everybody out. They all moved a little further south to the bridge. A CHP officer was stabbed by one of them. They were very upset they were moved. They thought Super Bowl City would be a cash cow for them to make money. The area they relocated to was outside a very exclusive neighborhood. Day 1 – more law enforcement than citizens. 3:00 PM on the first day concrete fell in the bay bridge tunnel. It was 80 years old. Day 2 – spilled substance on toll plaza of bay bridge. They weren’t sure what the substance was. After they found out it wasn’t hazmat, they cleaned it in four hours. The rest of the week nothing was out of order. They had a very short cycle of interoperability. They tried to catch anything as soon as it happened. They used the admin staff for 24 hours. They used the admin staff as command staff. It was a challenge to do this for 8 days. On Sunday they had a super bowl party. They were wiped out by then. Half of the staff took a nap then. Biggest takeaways: Nobody got hurt. Nobody from Caltrans got into an accident. No additional media interest. How did you deal with HAZMAT trucks that wanted to use the bridge? There were no additional restrictions. A lot of people avoided the corridor for the week. They predicted gloom for traffic, and this resulted in a reduction in ADT. At the beginning, everybody had tunnel vision for Santa Clara. Jim had to get them to think about San Francisco once the plan for Super Bowl City was announced.

Ohio DOT’s RNC Preparation and Review RNC declared a National Special Security Event (NSSE). This involved DHS, United States Secret Service (USSS), FBI, and FEMA. What is a NSSE? The first meeting was just an introduction. The people in charge of setting this up were the new secret service. They looked at blast areas and decided what to corridor off. USSS had 24 separate subcommittees. July 18-21 – City of Cleveland Aug. 8 – Fox News Debate Sept. 2015 all state agencies with RNC impact. RNC Committee on Arrangements – GOP Express – 365 passenger busses, 60 other. 16K hotel rooms with 5K hotel rooms in downtown Cleveland. 50K attendees, including 15K credentialed media. Kent State Univ. housed Secret Service agents. ODOT Preparation: littler, graffiti, vegetation control, etc.

5

Ohio DPS – worked with secret service and FBI. Intelligence Liaison Officer training program. This is a federal initiative designed to support fusion centers. Some are called Terrorism Liaison Officers in other states. They introduce fusion center concepts and reporting suspicious activity. During the RNC they had a special tip line for the RNC. Employees were taught what to report, how to report, where to report. They had a traffic incident fatality that was cleared up in 22 minutes. There were no major incidents during the RNC. There were so many other events going on statewide that could have created a perfect storm, but there were no major incidents.

Incident Command System (ICS) & Departments of Transportation PowerPoint for this Session found in Appendix D 2002 Salt Lake City Winter Olympics. In 1999 they finished construction of the TMC, and this was done for the Olympics. 2005 – explosion of dynamite on a truck. UDOT was able to repair that quickly. They might not have understood they were working in ICS, but they were. 2014 – Earthquake in Napa, CA. Caltrans always has a seismic event. 1-2 weeks after Joaquin started, the earthquake in Napa cocured. He pulled out the COOP plan to see how quickly everybody could get back to work. 2014 – I-15 Flood in Moapa, NV. Seasonal rains in Sept. washed out sections of I-15. Utah handles 20% of trucking traffic in the US. 2015 Road Closure, I-15 in Utah. A Bucket truck hit a powerline and shut down the road in the heart of Salt Lake City. This was a DOT event. 2015 Road Closure – I-80 in Utah. They accidentally cut a Verizon line. This was a major line they had to get up and running right away. 2015 – Road Closure on I-80 between Terwillis City and Nevada. A car was sandwiched and it resulted in a fatality. 2015 – Flooding in Hildale, Utah. ICS is a pull, not a push. This was a small community that doesn’t trust outsiders. This was the one event where UDOT controlled their response in an ICS fashion. 2016 – Attack in Taylorsville, UT. Potential active shooter. Driver’s license revoked from DUI. He called earlier and demanded his license back. He got into his RV and drove it into the front of their building because they share a building with DPS. He wanted to get out and start shooting, but he was stuck and couldn’t get out. So he shot himself. Supporting Other Jurisdictions

Chad Ray – Colorado DOT

Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC)

Covers liability, workman’s comp, and carries the responder’s existing credentialing over

to the state they are deployed to.

Requires the governor of the impacted state to declare a disaster before it can be

invoked.

6

The resource request is in effect put out to bid with other states in the compact. The

issue of private providers under other states emergency contracting provisions was

brought up – need further investigation.

There are mission ready packages, combinations of equipment and personnel, to

accomplish tasks identified previously.

Equipment typing enables rapid identification and selection.

There is also the ability to tap into resources that might be in a training capacity (i.e.

National Guard) that provides a win-win.

Derial Bivens – Tennessee DOT

Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP)

Framework for evaluating an emergency management program to determine if it is

holistic.

Common terms/terminology are looked for.

Does not mandate the “how” so long as the points in the evaluation process are

addressed and crosslinked between the subsections of the evaluation.

The how may be in written format (existing regulations, plans, cycles), oral (ability to

explain from rogue memory) or procedural (processes routinely used)

The assessment team is comprised of emergency management professionals with the

procedure being on-site. This essentially makes this a peer review process.

Findings are turned over to a review committee for final determination.

Dilbert Jordan & Jim Cooper – Texas DOT and Texas A&M Forest Services

Presentation was co-presented with each covering what they could, and couldn’t do, in

a response.

Several examples presented where one side would complement the other in these

“blind” spots.

The unique nature of Texas A&M, an academic institution, having a forestry service

component was called out.

Underpinning note was that if one of these two ran into a problem they would work

with the other to try and resolve it. Universal theme of emergency management.

Dan Goodrich – Mineta Transportation Institute

The issues with certification carrying from one state to another raises questions about the

quality of work being performed at the expectation level (legal, ethical) of the requesting state.

The response resources brought in through EMAC could result in a protracted recovery period

due to application of standards that might be lower, or significantly higher, than the local

standards. Standardization of resources, training and regulations help to mitigate that issue but

each state/county/city/township/special district was created for a specific mandate and has

evolved to meet the needs of its citizens. Fire services are a prime example. Local Fire

apparatus are frequently custom designed to address their jurisdictions needs. Another

7

example is private utilities with west coast equipment being significantly different in size and

capability than east coast assets as seen with the response to hurricane Sandy.

The EMAP approach, holistic peer evaluation, seems to offer the ability to identify capability

without mandating a specific approach or system leading to potential typing. It is typing,

derived through a process of peer review based on capability that seems to strike the balance

between standardization and jurisdictional uniqueness. This is similar to the process Fire has

used in its typing. The basis of division into types must come from the discipline it belongs to as

the equipment, training, regulations and organizational structure and several other factors

culminate in capability. Generally, Law Enforcement doesn’t “know” Fire as each was created

under different mandates and evolved differently. Imagine then Law Enforcement trying to

“type” Fire for potential deployment. The same applies to an external entity trying to do so for

transportation.

SECTION II – POTENTIAL CONSIDERATIONS IN FUTURE MEETING

PLANNING

The following are observations mentioned at this year’s meeting. Several themes and thoughts

are repeated from previous years meetings. The reader may wish to review conference

feedback sections of previous Summary Reports.

- The Plenary Session was efficiently and timely managed – however, it is still dominated

by updates rather than focusing on topic of the conference and adding new and thought

provoking comments.

- Keynote speaker was interesting but his material was not related to the theme of the

conference. Similar speakers may be better used as a lunch speaker.

- There is a need for more focus on emerging research and its application to agency

operations.

- It is apparent that the SCOTSEM Annual Meeting is morphing into the State DOT

Emergency Managers Conference. This will be difficult to re-scope, if desired.

- If major technical tours are scheduled in the mornings it should be noted that it will

detract from the overall flow of the Meeting.

- On a related note, two major off-site events also detracted from the overall program.

- The breakout and more interactive sessions appeared well received.

- A variety of ideas were raised to help focus and strengthen next year’s Annual Meeting:

8

o Half day optional orientation session (DOT, TSA, FHWA, AASHTO, TRB)

o Co-sponsor engagement

o Meeting 2.5 - 3 days max

o More technical hands on sessions, less talking heads

o Resilience research in-progress updates

o Incorporate sponsor trade show

o Incorporate poster exhibits

o Lunch speakers (humorists, futurists, CT briefers, state showcase)

o Speaker guidelines for those making presentations

o Session Evaluation Forms

o Put roundtables earlier in meeting

Check In Last NameFirst NameCompany

X Abcede George State of Hawaii, Department of Transportation

Anderson William Transportation Research Board

Bivens Derial TN DOT

Booher Brooks Arkansas State Highway and Transportation Department

Burgess Eddie Tennessee Emergency Management Agency

Cabral Irene Florida Department of Transportation

Campbell Kimberly Arizona Department of Transportation

ContestabileJohn JHUAPL

Cooper Jim Texas A&M Forest Service

Cooper David Transportation Security Administration

Corbin Mack M.H. Corbin LLC

Coulter Mel Idaho Transportation Department

Daley Michael C. WVDOT

DAVIS OSCAR North Carolina Emergency Management (NCDPS)

DRISSI-HABTIMonssef IFSTTAR

Egliskis David ADOT

Ekern David DS Ekern Consulting

Ellis Anne AASHTO

Eplin Raymond WVDOT

Ernst Steve Federal Highway Administration

Fletcher David GPC, Inc

Frazier, Sr.Ernest R. Countermeasures Assessment and Security Experts, LLC

Gallien Ronald KirkLADOTD

Garcia Rene Caltrans

Goodrich Daniel Caltrans

Haglin Todd MnDOT

Hambrick Walter Texas Department of Transportation

Hilyer Chris Alabama DOT

Hoke Richard Digital Traffic Systems, Inc.

Joncas ChristopherNevada DOT

Jordan Gilbert Texas Department of Transportation

Kerttula Walt Montana Department of Transportation

King Jeffrey Federal Highway Administration

Korty Thomas Illinois Department of Transportation

Lane Thomas Arizona Department of Transportation - Enforcement and Compliance Division

Lathan Dale WSDOT

Lissade Herby Caltrans

Lowder Michael US DOT - Office of Intelligence, Security & Emergency Response

McDiarmidMeredith North Carolina DOT

McNary William Wisconsin DOT

McWhorterRobert Alabama Department of Transportation

Merckle Carl the Ohio Department of Transportation

Micham Cliff WebEOC

Miederhoffwilliam Colorado DOT

Miller Brittany

Mixco Joaquin Utah Department of Transportation

Monteleone, RSPDaniel Alaska DOT/PF

Morelock Joe Illinois Department of Natural Resources

Mrozinski Laura Battelle

Mueller Kevin Hinman Consulting Engineers

Murray P.E.Andy ADOT

Ness Brian Idaho Transportation Department

Ness Jackie

Parker Stephan Transportation Research Board

Parra Lorenzo Massachusetts DOT

Patterson Heath Mississippi Department of Transportation

Penders Michael ESI

Phifer Eileen Michigan Department of Transportation

Polunsky Steven Texas A&M Transportation Institute

Pribyl Brian Iowa Department of Transportation

Province James California Department of Transportation

Radow Laurel Federal Highway Administration

Ray Chad Colorado Department of Transportation

Reynolds Jeff UDOT

Richy Brad Idaho Office of Emergency Management

Roper Anthony North Carolina Department of Transportation

Roper Antoinette

Runyon Chuck WVDOT

Scrivani John VDOT

Seyler Lisa Run Consultants, LLS

Smith Michael University of Virginia

Smyser John PA Department of Transportation

Tavares Tony California Department of Transportation

Thomas John Tennessee Department of Transportation

Tyler Mary Ohio Homeland Security

VanderpoolTom INDOT

Western Jeffrey Western Management and Consulting

Whitley Battle NC Department of Transportation

Younie Bob Iowa DOT

Zelinski Patrick AASHTO