incident management successful practices, a cross … cd/menu files/materials...wisdom and expertise...

NOTICEThe United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers.Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear herein only because they areconsidered essential to the objective of this document.

Dear Reader,

We have scanned the country and brought together the collectivewisdom and expertise of transportation professionals implementingIntelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) projects across the United States.This information will prove helpful as you set out to plan, design, anddeploy ITS in your communities.

This document is one in a series of products designed to help youprovide ITS solutions that meet your local and regional transportationneeds. The series contains a variety of formats to communicate withpeople at various levels within your organization and among yourcommunity stakeholders:

• Benefits Brochures let experienced community leaders explain in theirown words how specific ITS technologies have benefited their areas;

• Cross-Cutting Studies examine various ITS approaches that can betaken to meet your community’s goals;

• Case Studies provide in-depth coverage of specific approaches takenin real-life communities across the United States; and

• Implementation Guides serve as “how to” manuals to assist yourproject staff in the technical details of implementing ITS.

ITS has matured to the point that you are not alone as you move towarddeployment. We have gained experience and are committed toproviding our state and local partners with the knowledge they need tolead their communities into the next century.

The inside back cover contains details on the documents in this series,as well as sources to obtain additional information. We hope you findthese documents useful tools for making important transportationinfrastructure decisions.

Christine M. Johnson Edward L. ThomasProgram Manager, Operations Associate Administrator forDirector, ITS Joint Program Office Research, Demonstration andFederal Highway Administration Innovation

Federal Transit Administration

1

Incident Management Overview 2

Why Is Incident Management for You? 4

Incident Congestion and Impacts 6

Who Is Involved? 7

– Transportation Agencies 8

– Law Enforcement 9

– Service Patrols 10

– Fire and Rescue 12

– HAZMAT 13

– Towing and Recovery 14

Incident Detection and Verification 16

Incident Response 18

Site Management 19

Incident Clearance 20

Interagency Coordination andCooperation 22

Incident Management Trainingand Leadership 24

Strategic Planning for Incident Management 26

Incident Verification

Incident Response

Incident Detection

2

Incident management is the process of managing multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional responses to highwaytraffic disruptions. Efficient and coordinated management of incidents reduces their adverse impacts onpublic safety, traffic conditions, and the local economy.

This document focuses on managing the majority of traffic incidents, averaging less than two hours induration, through the daily coordination described in the following pages. Incidents of longer duration,special events, such as a Super Bowl or the Summer Olympics, and natural disasters, such as hurricanes orearthquakes, have significant impacton traffic and demand resourcesfrom the organizations identifiedin this and other documents.These types of major events alsorequire considerable planning andpreparation from a wider scope ofparticipants. For example,although public transit is likely nota significant participant in brieftraffic incidents, it is acritical component inaddressing a majorregional event.

While this documentfocuses on managingtypical traffic incidents,these same factors areessential to successfullymanaging both smalland large scale inci-dents: having a plan,and executing it withfull cooperation among allof the organizationsinvolved.

Incident Clearance

RecoveryRecovery

Incident Site Management

Traffic Management

3

“The North Carolina incidentmanagement program does avery effective job of respondingto incidents on ourhighways…it greatly reducesthe negative impact ofincidents on the free flow oftraffic.”

—Frank Emory, Jr., Memberof the North CarolinaBoard of Transportation

MINNESOTA

Minnesota Highway Helper Program

• Duration of vehicle stalls reducedby 8 minutes

• Annual delay savings due to reduceddelay assessed at $1.4 million (programoperation costs $600,000/year)

DENVER, COCourtesy Patrol Program

• Traffic delay costs reduced by$0.80 – $1.0 million for the A.M. period

• Traffic delay costs reduced by$0.90 – $0.95 million for the P.M. period

• Benefit to cost ratio from 10.5:1 to 16.9:1

4

Incident management yields significant benefits throughreduced vehicle delays and enhanced safety to motoriststhrough the reduction of incident frequency and improvedresponse and clearance times. These delay savings and theconsequent increased travel speeds considerably reducevehicle emissions. Across the nation, incident managementprograms have delivered significant and measurable benefits

Freeway Service Patrol (Since August 1992)

SAN FRANCISCO, CA

• Assisted more than 90,000 drivers(as of January 1997)

• Hydrocarbon emissions reduced by 32 kg/day• Carbon monoxide (CO) emissions reduced

by 322 kg/day• Nitrous oxides (NOx) emissions reduced

by 798 kg/day

TransGuide System

SAN ANTONIO, TX

• Total accidents reduced 35%• Total accidents reduced 40% during inclement weather• Secondary incidents reduced 30%• Overall accident rate reduced 41%• Significant improvements in driver confidence• Average response time reduced 20%• Average delay savings per incident: 700 vehicle-hours• Average reduction in fuel consumption per incident: 2600 gallons• Benefits translate to annual savings of $1.65 Million

BROOKLYN, NY

After - Average timeto clear any type ofincident = 31 minutes(66% decrease)

Gowanus Expressway/Prospect ExpresswayRehabilitation Incident Detection System

Before - Averagetime to clear anytype of incident= 90 minutes

• Freeway incidents reduced 40%• Freeway closure time cut by up to 55%• Incident severity rate reduced by 8%

PHILADELPHIA, PAI-95 Traffic and Incident Management

System (TIMS)

TranStar System

HOUSTON, TX

Annual delay savings of 572,095 vehicle-hours with economicvalue of $8.4 millionI-10 Katy Freeway Ramp Metering Program: daily delay savingsof 2875 vehicle-hours with economic value of $37,030An aggregate of seven example situations of lifting HOVrestrictions resulted in savings of between 13.5 and 27 minutesfor 12,910 vehicles (over other vehicles remaining in the queue)amounting to total cost savings from $42,500 to $85,100Reduced incident detection & response times cut hydrocarbonemissions by 91 kg/day

5

that justify existing programs and the initiation of newprograms. The benefits illustrated here are a snapshot ofexperiences from across the country. Each location has uniquefeatures as part of its incident management system and hencethe benefits presented must be considered in the appropriatecontext.

GDOT NaviGAtor SystemATLANTA, GA

• Average time to verify incidents reduced from 4.2 minutes to1.1 minutes during the first three weeks of system operation

• Average time to generate an automated incident responseafter incident verification reduced from 9.5 minutes to 4.7 minutesduring the first three weeks of system operation

• Mean time between incident verification and the clearance oftravel lanes reduced from 40.5 minutes to 24.9 minutes during thefirst three weeks of system operation

• Maximum time between incident verification and the clearance oftravel lanes reduced from 6.25 hours to 1.5 hours during the firstthree weeks of system operation

• Benefit to cost ratio in 1997: 2.3:1 (calculated as a result ofreduced delay due to accidents on the freeway)

• Benefit to cost ratio of CHART Program = 5.6:1• Benefits amount to 2 million vehicle-hours

of non-recurrent congestion delay savingsper year

MARYLANDMaryland CHART Program

Want more benefits and costinformation?Intelligent Transportation SystemsBenefits: 1999 Update (28 May 1999).Electronic Document LibraryNumber 8323.http://www.its.fhwa.dot.gov/cyberdocs/welcom.htmandITS Benefits and Cost Data Basehttp://www.mitretek.org/its/benecost.nsf

Traffic incidents are a major cause of congestion on the nation’shighway network. More than half of all freeway trafficcongestion in the United States is caused by incidents. Thisincident-related congestion problem is expected to worsen inthe near future.

“Incident” refers to any event that degrades safety and slowstraffic, including disabled vehicles, crashes, maintenanceactivities, adverse weather conditions, special events, and debrison the roadway. Incident-related traffic congestion (includingsecondary impacts) detrimentally affects public safety, the localeconomy, and the environment. It is estimated that thiscongestion will cost the U.S. public $75 billion in lostproductivity and 8.4 billion gallons of wasted fuel in the year2005 (Lindley, 1989).

6

When incidents occur, lanes are blocked, thereby reducingroadway capacity. As illustrated above, the difference betweenthe traffic demand and available capacity at the incidentlocation determines the delay caused by the incident. Bydisseminating information about the incident to the public,motorists can make alternative travel plans and delays can bereduced.

RecoveryClearance

Time (Hours)

Additional Delaywithout DemandReduction

Incident Duration Recovery

Cumulative Delay withDemand Reduction

7

State and Local Transportation Agencies —include statedepartments of transportation and highway agencies thatoperate and maintain the road network in the region.

State and Local Law Enforcement Agencies—include state,county, and city police departments that are responsible forpublic safety and enforcement.

Fire and Rescue Agencies—include county and city fire,ambulance, and support response agencies; these also includevolunteer and private fire and rescue organizations.

HAZMAT Clean-up Services—include private companies thatprovide cleanup services for HAZMAT incidents; firedepartments have HAZMAT containment capability, but relyupon private companies for HAZMAT cleanup.

Towing and Recovery Companies—include privatecompanies that provide towing and recovery services forhighway incidents.

Public and Private Traveler Information Providers—includepublic agencies and private companies that collect, process,and disseminate traffic and transport-related information tobenefit travelers using methods such as commercial and cabletelevision, radio, Internet, and changeable message signs.

“Incident management justmakes sense. We, astransportation professionals, areresponsible for providing thepublic with an efficientlyoperated and safe transportationsystem. The impact of not doingso is significant—personalinjuries, time loss, fuelconsumption, delays in criticalgoods reaching their destination,and other economic impacts.”

—Thomas Brahms, ExecutiveDirector, Institute ofTransportation Engineers

8

• Transportation agencies typicallyfocus their response priorities onthe restoration of normal trafficflow and minimization of delays

• State transportation agencyincident management operationsare predominately focused onfreeways, and as a result, veryfew employ integrated arterialsignal control for trafficmanagement during incidents

• The primary traveler informationdevices operated bytransportation agencies arechangeable message signs andlane control signals, which, atpresent, seldom providemotorists sufficient informationto alter travel plans.

• Traffic operations centers can function asinformation management centers in support ofmultiagency operations

• Because route diversion has been proven to be aneffective incident management tool, state andlocal transportation agencies should develop acombined strategy and implementation plan forcoordinated arterial signal control duringincidents

• Using changeable message signs to provideadditional incident information to motorists, suchas estimated travel times, improves the value ofthe information and motorist compliance.

• Law enforcement and trafficmanagement center personnelmust be coordinated, not simplycollocated

• Law enforcement resources willbe available to respond to moreurgent concerns by drawing onresources, such as closed-circuittelevision (CCTV) for incidentverification and service patrols torespond to disabled vehicles

• By closely coordinating withtraffic management centerpersonnel after arriving at thescene of an incident, lawenforcement personnel canimprove on-scene command andcontrol

• Use of law enforcementpersonnel on motorcycles forincidents occurring during peaktravel periods can improveresponse times.

• Typically, law enforcement agencies are more closelycoordinated with transportation agencies than are fire andrescue agencies

• Few law enforcement officers continue to coordinate withthe local traffic management center once they are at thescene of an incident

• In several study areas, law enforcement assets aredispatched to every incident, including disabled vehicles

• Crash investigations, especially for fatal crashes, frequentlyare very time consuming when using traditionalinvestigation techniques.

“It can be awkward for police officers to have a trafficmanagement center dispatch telling them how to do theirjob. We rotate officers to work in our transportationmanagement center (TMC) and to experience thetechnology firsthand. Now when they are dispatched to afreeway incident, the police will radio the TMC for moredetailed information on the location and severity of anincident.”

—Police Captain Timothy Kelly, TMC OperationsSupervisor, Houston Metro

9

• Service patrols typically offer abroad range of services:

– All offer basic motoristassistance, debris removal,and vehicle clearance

– In addition, some offer firstaid, basic field repairs, andtraffic control assistance

• Motorists have responded veryfavorably to service patrols,particularly regarding the—

– Timeliness of assistance

– Feeling of safety and securityderived from uniformedpersonnel assistance

– Free services

• In the study areas, service patrolsoperated only on parts of thelocal freeway network, bridges,and other controlled-accessfacilities.

“Our safety service patrol trucks have beena tremendous benefit to us. I considerthem as building blocks of our incidentmanagement system because the success ofour four trucks has won us politicalsupport both internally in the DOT andexternally with elected officials. We havenow been given a budget towards cameras,variable message signs, and other newtechnologies.”

—Patricia Harrison, Safety Director,South Carolina DOT

10

San Antonio, TX

Freeway Courtesy Patrol

Miles Patrolled per Day: 1,650

Number of Vehicles: 3

Incident Responses/Day: 35

Avg. Response Time (Min.): 15

Seattle, WA

Incident Response Units

Miles Patrolled per Day: 80




San Francisco, CA

Freeway Service Patrol (FSP)




Avg. Response Time (Min.): 9.7

Los Angeles, CA




Incident Responses/Day: 1,000


San Diego, CA






Orange Co., CAFreewayService Patrol (FSP)





• To be fully effective, servicepatrols must communicate andcoordinate activities with otherresponding agencies, and shouldhave access to the proper radiofrequencies

• Outsourcing of service patroloperations is beneficial becauseit—

– Is easier to allocate and adjustresources according to needs

– Minimizes unit costs due tocompetition among providers

• Service patrols on bridges and intunnels (where access is severelyconstrained) are critical torestoring the normal traffic flow.

11

Houston, TX

Motorist Assistance Program (MAP)




Avg. Response Time (Min.): 8.5

Atlanta, GA

Highway Emergency ResponseOperators (HEROS)





Detroit, MI

Freeway Courtesy Patrol

Miles Patrolled per Day: 800



Avg. Response Time (Min.): N/A

Chicago, IL

Minutemen




Avg. Response Time (Min.): N/A

• In some study areas, fire andrescue agencies drawinformation from CCTV feedsbroadcast by local transportationagencies, allowing for timely andaccurate dispatch of assets

• Fire and rescue personnel’s firstpriority is the safety of motorists,victims, other responders, andthe public; a secondary emphasisis placed on resuming the flowof traffic

• Traffic incident responserepresents only a small portionof the responsibilities of fire andrescue agencies

• Fire and rescue agencies oftenare not deeply involved incoordinated multiagency trafficincident management programs.

• Fire and rescue operations are critical to thedevelopment of a cross-functional operationsplan

• Fire and rescue agencies have consideredmodification of their operations procedures tobetter accommodate traffic management duringincidents

• Aggressively seeking and maintaining theinvolvement of fire and rescue in multiagencyplanning and coordination will help ensure theirfull cooperation in traffic incident managementactivities and programs.

12

“During the Olympic Games in Atlanta, as part of our jointresponse efforts with the GDOT, the state patrol, and the citypolice, we saw how beneficial the video surveillancecameras were. Being able to view the scene of a freewayincident using the surveillance cameras helped us to betterdecide the type and number of units to send to the incident.”

—Tony Davidson, Chief of Communications,Atlanta Fire Department

13

• Both state transportation agencies and local fire and rescueagencies respond to HAZMAT incidents

• All study areas employ private HAZMAT clean-up services:

– A portion of the costs are financed by clean-up chargesassessed to the party responsible for the incident

– Clean-up costs for large spills are very high and arenormally recouped

– Small spills are also costly because of their highfrequency, but efforts to recoup costs for cleanups arelargely unsuccessful.

• Service patrol vehicles equippedwith basic HAZMAT responseequipment can more effectivelymanage the containment ofminor spills and protect theincident scene.

• Standard incident managementprocedures may need to bemodified in order toaccommodate the risks involvedin working with and aroundhazardous materials at HAZMATincidents. Specializedtechniques and speciallyqualified personnel are oftennecessary for safe and effectiveHAZMAT incident management.

• Providing incentives for HAZMATcontractors based on timelinessand efficiency of response andcleanup can minimize costswhile maintaining performance.

“Effective first response is critical in successful HAZMAT

incident handling. Though HAZMAT incidents are usually

handled by fire departments, it is typically the law enforcement

or DOT patrols that perform the ‘first verification’ role.

Training these crews to accurately identify the presence and

nature of the HAZMAT will greatly alleviate the HAZMAT

incident response process. In GDOT, our HEROs are trained

not only to identify the HAZMAT involved, but also to contain

certain types of spillage using equipment onboard their trucks

until the fire department arrives. This alone has saved us

hundreds of hours of delay and environmental damages due to

spillage on Atlanta highways.”

—Joe Stapleton, Assistant State Traffic Operations

Engineer, Georgia Department of Transportation

14

Towing and recovery are the operationsby which a tow truck or other responsevehicle clears the roadway of disabledvehicles or accidents and assists inrestoring the roadway to full capacity.Public agencies do not provide towingand recovery services; the private sectorenters into contracts with the governmentto provide these services on freeways.

• Several arrangements for towingare used across the country. Theprimary types are—

– Franchise-based towing:Services are contracted inseveral subarea franchises toindividual tow operators;this arrangement eliminatessituations in which severaltow operators compete toservice the same incident ona first-come/first-serve basis

– City- or region-basedtowing: The towingcontract for the entire city orregion goes to the lowestbidder; this arrangementreduces the transportationagency’s administrativesupport and monitoringrequirements

– Rotation: The firstresponder (typically thepolice) calls a tow truck fromthe next eligible firm insequence on a rotating list ofpre-qualified tow operators.Pre-qualification helps toprevent overcharging of theowner of the disabledvehicle. Equipment Services Provided

Light Tow Trucks Clear disabled and wreckas cars and vans

Service Patrol Trucks Provide relocation of disadrop-off sites; provide m

Heavy Tow Trucks and Rotators Clear disabled and wrecktrailers)

Earthmoving Equipment Used for restoring pavemin case of pavement dam

Inflatable Air Bag Systems Used to upright overturne

HAZMAT Response Equipment Used to handle hazardou

• Because they are critical torapidly restoring normal trafficflow, towing operators should beinvolved in interagency incidentmanagement training

• A hybrid of traditional andperformance-based contractingthat requires operators to meetspecific requirements (e.g.,number of vehicles, responserates and times, storage space,insurance and licensing) canimprove responsiveness andreduce cost.

ssenger vehicles such

ehicles to designated assistance

avy vehicles ( e.g., tractor

safe driving conditions

icles

mical spills

15

Cell Phones20%

Call Boxes40%

ServicePatrols

23%

Other17%

Orange Co., CA

Cell Phones40%

CCTV20%

AID Systems40%

San Antonio, TX

CellPhones

70%

LawEnforcement

5%

Service Patrols10%

Other15%

San Francisco, CA

Cell Phones78%

Other2%

CCTV2%Service

Patrols18%

Seattle, WA

Call Boxes8%

Other14%

Cell Phones78%

San Diego, CA

Other4%

LawEnforcement

3%

ServicePatrols

3% CellPhones

54%

Call Boxes36%

Los Angeles, CA

16

• First-responder reports are themost accurate and trustworthymethod for incident verification

• Cellular phones are the mostcommon method for incidentdetection in metropolitan areas:

– Cellular phone-basedincident detection hasinherently high detectionrates and low cost

– Incident detection times forcellular phones are generallyshort—usually less than oneminute during peak travelperiods

– The accuracy of incidentinformation from motorists’cellular calls is ofteninsufficient for initiating anearly optimal response

• Where available, closed-circuittelevision (CCTV) is the mostcost-effective and efficientmethod for incident verification

– Typical CCTV deploymentpractice has been to provideblanket coverage on selectedportions of the freewaynetwork

• Automated incident detectionsystems are available but notwidely used:

– False alarm rates are typicallyhigher than other detectionmethods

– System data requirementsdemand significantequipment investment andmaintenance.

Incident detection is the determination by a respondingauthority that an incident has occurred. Detection initiatesverification and response activities. Incident detectionmethods include cellular phone calls from motorists, callboxes located along highways, automated incident detectionbased on traffic surveillance, CCTV cameras, aerialsurveillance, service patrols, and land phones.

Atlanta, GA

CellPhones

80%

CCTV

3%

Other2%

ServicePatrols

15%

Chicago, IL

CellPhones

50%

LawEnforcement

17%

Other5%

Service Patrols28%

Cell Phones90%

ServicePatrols

2% Other4%

LawEnforcement

2%

Detroit, MI

Cell Phones85%

LawEnforcement

5%

CCTV5%

Other5%

Montgomery Co., MD

Cell Phones90%

Other4%

ServicePatrols

3%Law

Enforcement3%

Houston, TX

17

• Resources allocated toimproving incident detectiontimes are best directed at—

– Providing and promotingtoll-free cellular phonenumbers to report incidents

– Training operators to elicituseful information about theincident from motorists

• A centralized system forgathering and disseminatingincident detection informationfacilitates the timely andappropriate dispatch ofpersonnel to the scene

• When funding for CCTVinstallation is limited, strategiccamera placement directed athigh-incident locations can beused in place of blanketcoverage

• Compressed video offers a cost-effective alternative to full-motion video for most incidentverification needs.

Incident verification is the determination of the precise locationand nature of the incident. Accurate and detailed informationabout the incident enable the dispatch of the most appropriatepersonnel and resources to the scene. Verification methodsinclude in-person verification by dispatched personnel,synthesis of accumulated information from multiple cellularphone calls, and the use of CCTV cameras. Verification isneeded to prevent deploying resources to false incidentreports.

18

• Joint training among incident response agencies is criticalto improving response times

• Incident response performance can be dramaticallyenhanced—and costs can be decreased—byinstitutionalizing information sharing among agencies

• A standard set of interagency response action plans,tailored for various incident scenarios and supported byshared data, will improve the speed of the incidentresponse process

• Optimum response is sending the right equipment andpersonnel to the incident scene quickly; overresponding toincidents (dispatching more resources than is necessary) orunder-responding (not sending enough resources) result inincreased cost and degrade effectiveness of the response

• Optimum response depends on accurate and rapidverification, as well as coordinated agency planning andcommunication.

Incident response is the activation of a planned strategy forthe safe and rapid deployment of the most appropriate per-sonnel and resources to the scene. Information managementplays an important role in response by providing the necessarydetails to the appropriate response personnel.

• Computer-Aided Dispatch (CAD)

• Service Patrol Fleets

• Towing and Recovery Vehicles

• Law Enforcement Fleets

• Fire Engines

• Rescue Units/Ambulances

• Major Incident Response Teams

• Changeable Message Signs (CMS)

• HAZMAT Response Units

• Arterial Signal Control

• Greater interagencycoordination, increased incidentmanagement awareness, andtechnological advancementshave resulted in significantimprovements to the efficiencyof incident response

• In most of the study areas,incident response componentsfrom different agencies continueto be dispatched independently,and on-scene coordination issporadic

• Incident response priorities varyby responding agency—somefocus on minimizing trafficdelays, some on scene security

• Advances in communicationstechnology have outpacedcoordination efforts amongresponding agencies.

19

Site management is the management of resources to removethe incident and reduce the impact on traffic flow. It involvescoordination of activities by various responding agencypersonnel—usually under an incident command system—andprovides for safety and security at the incident scene.

The incident command system (ICS) approach is followednationwide for incident clearance. The ICS consists of ahierarchy of predefined roles and responsibilities for incidentmanagement command, operations, and communications.The purpose of establishing a predefined structure is toensure a coordinated and decisive reaction to the clearance ofan incident.

• In large incidents, site management is unified with policeor fire being “in charge” of the scene

• The use of common terminology and technology (e.g.,radio systems) facilitates effective and clear communica-tions among the different responding agency personnel

– Unified command structures and procedures, such asthe designation of a command post, are adopted tocentralize incident communications and make inci-dent management operations more efficient.

• Site management trainingshould include all agenciesinvolved in incidentmanagement to build a cross-agency team working together toaccomplish individual agencygoals

• Formalizing incident commandprotocols ensures theoptimization of time andresources by avoidingredundancy in roles

• Post-incident debriefings shouldbe conducted regularly (andsoon after major incidents) toevaluate and refine existingprotocols and procedures

• Major incident response teams areeffective in managing multiagencyresources and facilitating unifiedcommand under the incidentcommand system.

20

• Incident clearance is typically themost time-consuming step in theincident management process—at least twice the duration ofother steps in the process

• Incident clearance is amultiagency process with asingle objective under theincident command structureapproach—to safely removeroadway obstructions andrestore the flow of traffic

• Actual clearance times typicallyare not documented in acomprehensive fashion, makingit difficult to assess and improveagency performance.

Incident clearance is the safe and timelyremoval of any stalled vehicles, wreckage,debris, or spilled material from the roadwayand its shoulders and the restoration of theroadway to its full capacity.

• Reducing clearance times has thegreatest potential effect (benefit)on improving overall incidentmanagement times

• Clearance times can decreasewhen the proper resources aredispatched to the scene

• Interagency cooperation amongfire and rescue, service patrols,law enforcement, and towingand recovery is critical toimproving incident clearanceperformance

• Through inter-jurisdictionaltraining, incident managementpersonnel gain a betterunderstanding of other agencies’concerns and missions andfacilitate communications,thereby improving clearancetimes

• Documentation of incidentclearance times will enablebetter understanding of incidentclearance performance and allowfor improvements in the future.

21

22

• Collocation of incidentmanagement personnel in aTMC does not imply cooperationamong them

• All best-practice locations havesome form of documentedinteragency agreements, butfrequently they do not includeall agencies involved in incidentmanagement

• Interagency relationships requireconstant attention to keepagencies focused on sharedincident management objectives

• Coordinated incidentmanagement action plansamong agencies are lacking inmost study areas

• Interagency coordination hasreduced clearance timessignificantly—between 5 and 50percent for various incidenttypes (the average reduction is15%)

• Noninstitutionalized interagencycoordination efforts dependhighly on a select group ofindividuals and are susceptibleto failure when these peoplevacate their positions

• Without a high degree ofinteragency coordination, thefull benefits of technologycannot be realized (e.g., sharedCCTV signals can providebenefits to multiple agencies).

Interagency coordination andcooperation facilitate efficiency inincident managementoperations. This is accomplishedby improving workingrelationships among incidentmanagement agenciesresponsible for transportation,law enforcement, fire and rescue,and environmental monitoringand safety from severaljurisdictions (city, county, andstate).

• Conduct of joint interagency training

• Development of interagency incident managementhandbooks

• Creation of interagency memoranda ofunderstanding

• Resource sharing among participating agencies

• Collocation of core incident management personnel(combined with joint training and education)

• Frequent interaction among partner agencies

• Prior joint planning for on-scene staging and trafficmanagement

• Incident data collection and dissemination ofincident information

• Conduct of periodic incident management programreviews and regular evaluation

Features of Interagency Coordination

23

• Interagency cross-trainingpromotes improved coordinationand cooperation amongpersonnel by fostering a betterunderstanding regarding differentagency priorities and procedures

• Cross-agency coordination isinstitutionalized when personnelat all levels of the organiza-tions—not just leaders andmanagers—buy in to theprogram

• Increased exposure to field-based on-the-job training andexercises builds credibility andtrust among agency personnel,resulting in—

– Enhanced on-scene safety

– Lower incident clearancetimes

– Faster restoration of normaltraffic flow

• Interagency programs need tobe structured, yet flexibleenough to evolve asexpectations change andknowledge is acquired

• Regular team debriefings andevaluation of incidentmanagement programs areneeded to sustain and improvehigh levels of coordination.

• Promote better understanding, trust, respect, and commu-nication among incident management agencies, leading toimproved clearance times

• Improve detection, response, and clearance times

• Promote the sharing of resources (equipment andpersonnel) among agencies

• Allow for better on-site management of incidents

• Promote better (more efficient) management policies

• Allow for improved sensitivity to each other’s organiza-tional needs and extended faith in each other’s abilities

• Allow agencies to gauge expectations

• Allow for improved safety resulting from more efficientresponse/incident clearance processes

• Allow for improved public awareness through bettercommunication and real-time updates about incidents tothe public (lowers number of secondary incidents)

Benefits of Interagency Coordination

“Without question, interagency cooperation can make a

tremendous difference. Conservatively, we have seen a 25%

improvement in incident response times through better

interagency cooperation.”

—Marion Waters, Georgia Department of Transportation

“Interagency cooperation has been our biggest

ally in putting together our incident

management and response program. It has

improved cooperation among agencies by

100%. Response times have decreased by 40%

with cooperation among agencies.”

—Jerry Althauser, Washington State

Department of Transportation, Seattle

24

Incident management training refers to theinteragency, multi-disciplinary training required toenable a high degree of coordination and the efficientuse of resources available for incident management.Incident management training includes classroom,field, and on-the-job training.

• Classroom Training– CPR

– Incident ResponseTabletops

– HAZMAT FirstResponder Activities

– Vehicle MechanicalCourses

– TMC traffic control andsoftware training

• Field Training– Interagency Incident

Response Exercises

– HAZMAT ResponseExercises

– Service Patrol OperationsTraining

– Traffic Control Training

– Emergency ResponseTraining

Training

• Time constraints createdifficulties in scheduling jointagency training

• Interagency training fostersworking relationships and trustamong incident managementpersonnel

• Few regions conduct formal,interagency training programson a regular basis

• Incident management trainingbudgets are typically combinedwith other incident managementprogram budgets

• All best practice locationsconduct internal incidentmanagement training for theiremployees

Leadership

• Many regions lack a definedleadership program

• Leadership succession modelsare not well developed

• Leaders are usually self-evolving—not elected orappointed.

• Training programs mustencompass large segments ofincident management personneland be ongoing to maintaintheir quality

• Training methods andapproaches must bedocumented and widelycirculated

• Monitoring and continuousimprovement of trainingprograms are critical to long-term success of incidentmanagement operations

• Joint field training amongagencies performing incidentmanagement is key to buildingcredibility and trust, resulting infaster response and clearancetimes

• Training programs must receivehigh priority from all agenciesduring the incident managementbudgeting process

• Agencies should pool resourcesto stretch training budgets

• Sharing experiences and ideasfrom other incidentmanagement programs willadvance program objectivesmore rapidly

• Incident management leadershipmust be based on a formalprogram

• To avoid a leadership vacuum, awell-defined leadershipsuccession model must beemployed

• Training and leadershipprograms require topmanagement attention andsupport.

Incident management leadership is the group of high-level andmid-level personnel from one or more agencies that championinteragency cooperation and coordination to achieve highefficiency of incident management operations.

Strong leadership is critical to the success of any incidentmanagement program. Successful leadership requires buy-in anddedication from both policymakers and managers, who mustdevote resources to devise plans and execute them in the field.

• State transportation agencies often serve asfacilitators in incident management

• In a few locations, senior staff are groomedto take leadership positions

• Roles and responsibilities are not clearlydefined

25

26

Incident management is an important operations function ofstate and local DOTs, law enforcement agencies, fire compa-nies, rescue agencies, tow operators, traveler informationproviders like the media, HAZMAT cleanup services, and aseries of other agencies that support these major players.Since it involves coordinating the operations of many of theseagencies to respond to incidents, incident management posesa significant institutional and management challenge. Thehuman and material resources of these agencies have to bemobilized and leveraged collectively within a short span oftime. Interagency relationships have to be developed andsustained to ensure high operational efficiency at the incidentscene. Technology can help improve incident response times,clearance efficiency, and smooth communications amongagencies, but technology alone cannot guarantee that thepartners will be able to work well together when significantdifferences in ideology and approaches exist between them.

Success under such conditions will come only with carefulplanning and efficient execution. This can be achievedthrough strategic planning for incident management. Each ofthe partner agencies is accountable to different elected andappointed bodies and source their budgets from taxes andother public revenue sources (except the private partners,whose services are paid for by the public agency partners).Each partner is also responsible for a wide range of services tobe rendered on a daily basis. In this environment, incidentmanagement can become a victim of budget cuts, loss infocus, or the departure of champions. Such losses can lead toa deterioration of the public’s mobility and safety levels onroadways.

Today’s best incident programs have developed from smallbeginnings under the leadership of self-styled champions(from one or two agencies) who have rallied the support oftheir peers in the partner agencies. These programs facedconsiderable difficulties in the beginning and consolidatedtheir position later when the benefits to the communitybecame clear. However, incident management is not a ‘corefunction’ considered during the budgeting process at most ofthe partner agencies, and the programs operate on smallbudgets and rarely enjoy visibility from top management atthe partner agencies. These problems can threaten programsustainability.

Technology alone cannot guaranteethat the partners will be able towork well together.

Success will come only with carefulplanning and efficient execution.

27

These deficiencies can be addressed effectively by adopting astructured strategic planning process for incident manage-ment at the regional and even statewide levels. By discussingand agreeing upon common objectives and approaches todeal with incidents, agencies can participate in the programknowing that their needs are understood by their partners.Projecting the potential benefits and obtaining top manage-ment buy-in at each of the partner agencies will ensure theprogram’s sustainability. A strategic plan must consider theneeds of the program’s ‘customers’—the travelling public—and coordinate its efforts with the media and employers in thearea to achieve high levels of information dissemination. Aphased implementation plan with detailed analysis of theresources needed to deliver the objectives agreed upon,together with a resource sharing plan, will clarify the contribu-tion of each partner and avoid surprises later. These, com-bined with a comprehensive program evaluation and benefitsassessment, will establish the foundation for a long termsustainable incident management program.

Programs such as maintenance management at DOTs andcrime prevention and education at law enforcement agenciestook several years to grow but have now become core compo-nents of the agencies’ operations. Incident managementprograms deserve such ‘core’ status within partner agenciesconsidering the benefits they deliver. This also can beachieved through interagency strategic planning for incidentmanagement.

An implementation guide, currently being developed, willaddress the issue of strategic planning for incident manage-ment. This document will present approaches to successfullyplan and operate regional incident management programs ina sustainable fashion. The document will be based on experi-ences and lessons learned from leading programs around thenation.

A strategic plan must consider theneeds of the program’s ‘customers’—the travelling public.

Incident management programsdeserve ‘core’ status withinpartner agencies.

Federal Highway Administration Resource Centers

Federal Transit Administration Regional Offices

For further information, contact:

Eastern Resource Center10 S. Howard StreetSuite 4000 – HRC-EABaltimore, MD 21201Telephone 410-962-0093

Southern Resource Center61 Forsyth Street, SWSuite 17T26 – HRC-SOAtlanta, GA 30303-3104Telephone 404-562-3570

Midwestern Resource Center19900 Governors HighwaySuite 301 – HRC-MWOlympia Fields, IL 60461-1021Telephone 708-283-3510

Western Resource Center201 Mission StreetSuite 2100 – HRC-WESan Francisco, CA 94105Telephone 415-744-3102

Region 1Volpe National Transportation Systems CenterKendall Square55 Broadway, Suite 920Cambridge, MA 02142-1093Telephone 617-494-2055

Region 2Alexander Hamilton Federal Building1 Bolling Green, Room 429New York, NY 10004Telephone 212-668-2170

Region 31760 Market Street, Suite 500Philadelphia, PA 19103-4124Telephone 215-656-7100

Region 4Atlanta Federal Center61 Forsyth Street, SWSuite 17T50Atlanta, GA 30303-3104Telephone 404-562-3500

Region 5200 West Adams Street24th Floor, Suite 2410Chicago, IL 60606-5232Telephone 312-353-2789

Region 6819 Taylor StreetRoom 8A36Fort Worth, TX 76102Telephone 817-978-0550

Region 7901 Locust Street, Suite 40Kansas City, MO 64106Telephone 816-329-3920

Region 8Columbine Place216 16th Street, Suite 650Denver, CO 80202-5120Telephone 303-844-3242

Region 9201 Mission Street, Suite 2210San Francisco, CA 94105-1831Telephone 415-744-3133

Region 10Jackson Federal Building915 Second Avenue, Suite 3142Seattle, WA 98174-1002Telephone 206-220-7954

THIS DOCUMENT IS ONE IN A SERIES OF PRODUCTS THAT

ADDRESS ITS I SSUES PERTINENT TO A VARIETY OF AUDIENCES

FOR A CURRENT LISTING OF AVAILABLE DOCUMENTS, PLEASE VISIT OUR WEB SITE AT:www.its.dot.gov

ELECTED AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS • SENIOR DECISION MAKERS

TRANSPORTATION MANAGERS • TECHNICAL EXPERTS

Representing:

STATES • CITIES • COUNTIES • TRANSIT PROPERTIES • TOLL AUTHORITIES

EMERGENCY SERVICE PROVIDERS • METROPOLITAN PLANNING ORGANIZATIONS

ADDITIONAL TRANSPORTATION STAKEHOLDERS

• COMMERCIAL VEHICLE OPERATIONS

• EMERGENCY SERVICES

• ENABLING TECHNOLOGIES

• EMISSIONS MANAGEMENT

• FREEWAY AND ARTERIAL MANAGEMENT

ITS Topics Addressed in This Series:

• PLANNING AND INTEGRATION

• REAL-TIME TRAVELER INFORMATION

• TRANSIT, TOLL, AND RAIL MANAGEMENT

• WEATHER INFORMATION FOR TRAVELERS

AND MAINTENANCE

FHWA-JPO-99-018

“One of our priorities on the I-70 Corridor is to getenough traveler information out to reduce the traveler

and incident responder problems. With goodinformation about an incident, travelers can either delaytheir trips or take an alternative route, and the incident

responders have less congestion to manage.”

— John Muscatell, Manager, Staff Trafficand Safety Branch, Colorado DOT

FTA-TRI-11-99-09

INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS

U.S. Department of Transportation400 7th Street, SW

Washington, DC 20590

Federal Transit AdministrationRoom 9402,TRI-10

Phone: (202) 366-4991Facsimile: (202) 366-3765

Federal Highway AdministrationRoom 3416, HOIT-1

Phone: (202) 366-0722Facsimile: (202) 493-2027

EDL # 11484

incident management successful practices, a cross … cd/menu files/materials...wisdom and expertise...

Documents