Traffic Incident Management (TIM)

Self-Assessment Guide

March 2004

Traffic Incident Management (TIM)

Self-Assessment Guide

1.  **Introduction and Background**

Over the past decade, coordinated traffic incident management efforts
have gained momentum as more and more transportation agencies seek ways
to safely and efficiently handle congestion. Traffic incident
management, once considered a disjointed activity fraught with turf
battles and jurisdictional conflicts, has, in some places around the
country, become a showcase of collaborative efforts between the various
traffic incident management stakeholders. The stakeholders are many --
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) and other federal agencies,
operations and maintenance personnel from state and local Departments of
Transportation, law enforcement, fire and rescue, emergency management,
the towing and recovery industry, hazardous materials contractors,
environmental specialists, transportation planners at the local,
regional and state level, and the media -- and they all play a role in
ensuring that incidents are quickly detected, responded to, and cleared
with minimum disruption to traffic flow. All of this is done while
giving first priority to the safety of the on-scene responders and the
motoring public.

Even with all the success in traffic incident management, a way to
measure the effectiveness of these programs is still needed. One of the
three objectives of the FHWA's Vital Few Congestion Goals, over the next
five years, is to reduce incident delay by ensuring all States, District
of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and Federal Land offices are engaged in
aggressively anticipating and mitigating congestion caused by incidents.
In order to measure progress toward achievement of that goal, and to
bring about recognized measures for evaluating traffic incident
management efforts, the Federal Highway Administration sponsored the
development of a Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Self- Assessment
tool.

The "TIM Self-Assessment" is a tool to be used by state and regional
program managers to assess their achievement of a successful
multi-agency program to manage traffic incidents effectively and safely.
The tool also provides a method to assess gaps and needs in existing
multi-agency regional and statewide efforts to mitigate congestion
caused by traffic incidents.

The TIM Self-Assessment consists of a series of questions designed to
allow those with traffic incident management responsibilities to rate
their performance in specific organizational and procedural categories.
Conducted as a group exercise, the TIM Self-Assessment allows for
discussion among the group members with the resulting ratings being
consensus values. This process provides a medium for enhanced
communication between TIM stakeholders to identify specific areas or
activities by which the multi-agency management of traffic incidents can
be improved.

The ratings can then be tallied to provide an overall TIM score for the
program. Areas for possible improvement can be identified through
individual question ratings. While the score provides a metric for
measurement, the most important information will be derived from the
discussion of the assessment among the participants. This discussion
will provide local agencies valuable information to form or improve a
multi-agency program for traffic incident management.

The TIM Self-Assessments will be used by FHWA to determine gaps
nationally that need attention and the information provided from the
assessments will be used to direct future years' FHWA program
initiatives for traffic incident management.

2.  **Conducting the Assessment**

The TIM Self-Assessment is intended to be a group exercise and as such,
should be conducted with as many TIM stakeholder representatives as
possible. A concise guide to facilitating the assessment is found in
Appendix B of this Guide. The convening organization should be an agency
heavily involved in coordinating traffic incident management activities
for the corridor, region or state conducting the assessment. In some
cases this may be the state or local police or the state Department of
Transportation, or perhaps the metropolitan planning organization.

Those invited to participate in the assessment should represent every
aspect of traffic incident management response, including
representatives from transportation departments, law enforcement, fire
and rescue, emergency management, environmental protection, and private
sector response contractors (towing and recovery and hazardous materials
contractors). Others to consider inviting include the local traffic
reporting media or other private sector groups responsible for
disseminating traffic information to motorists. In addition, high-level
decision makers need to make a commitment to this assessment activity
and to follow-up in ensuring the implementation of identified changes.

It is intended that conducting this assessment will take approximately
three to four hours, depending on the size of the group and the amount
of discussion each program area is expected to generate.

In advance of the assessment exercise, this Guide and the scoring
template should be provided to each invited participant. Each
participant should be asked to read the TIM Self-Assessment Guide,
consider the questions, and score each based on their understanding of
the level of success in each topic area. This exercise is not meant to
assess the performance of any single agency or partner, but of the TIM
program as a whole. Therefore, each participant should be instructed to
score the questions not from their agency's perspective, but from the
perspective of how the issue is addressed by all of the partners acting
together. The score sheet is set up electronically to facilitate its
completion and return to the facilitator or the convening organization.
Those score sheets should be submitted back to the facilitator or
convening organization in advance of the group assessment exercise so
that range and distribution of the scores for each question can be
tallied. Participants are encouraged to bring their individual score
sheets and comments to the assessment meeting for reference.

After the welcome and self-introductions, it is recommended that the
assessment facilitator review each of the topic areas before proceeding
to the actual assessment questions. For discussion of each assessment
question, the facilitator should open by presenting the range and
distribution of assessment scores as determined from the previously
submitted assessments. The facilitator should then encourage open and
honest discussion on each assessment question with the goal being to
reach group consensus on the score. Fractional and average scores should
be avoided.

Once consensus is reached, the facilitator should record the revised
score for that particular question and move on to the next. The revised
scores will then be totaled to give the overall score for the
assessment. Again, this is a consensus building exercise and as such,
the consensus opinion on the score for each question should be recorded
along with any strong dissents and the reasons for them noted in the
recordings of the exercise.

Suggestions for the Self-Assessment:

-   Assemble a team of traffic incident management stakeholders.

-   Include representatives of all agencies participating in TIM for the
    corridor, region or state.

-   Agency representatives should be actively involved in TIM
    activities.

-   Provide participants with this Guide and the score sheet in advance
    so that each may complete the assessment based on their individual
    understanding of the broad program-level of success in each area.

-   Ask the participants to return their completed score sheets in
    advance of the exercise so average scores can be tallied.

-   Have a designated facilitator for team meetings. The Division Office
    TIM person will usually facilitate, but Resource Center and
    Headquarters persons can help facilitate upon request.

-   Review each question and its range and distribution of scores to
    obtain a feel for a possible level of consensus on the score for
    each question.

-   Make note of any strong dissent to the majority opinion on any
    particular question.

**Scoring the Self-Assessment**

Score each question from 0 to 4, based on the your program's level of
progress in each area as detailed below. Also, the reasons for each
question scoring should be documented, if the opportunity exists. The
scores should reflect the assessment of a multi-agency program's
achievements and not those of the practices of individual agencies. Fire
and rescue departments are almost universally trained in and use an
Incident Command (or Incident Management) system (ICS) to manage
activities and resources (question 4.2.3.1). Other agencies may be
unfamiliar with ICS so its use at incident scenes is problematic and may
lead to disagreements and independent actions or decision-making.

The following is a generalized description of the scoring criteria. It
illustrates a gradation in progress from "not doing this at all" to
"this is a well-established activity fully supported and engaged by the
partner organizations".

Specific scoring guidance for each question is provided in Appendix C.
This specific guidance is offered only to illustrate what levels of
activity and inter-agency coordination are defined by the scores of 0
through 4. The specific scoring guidance is based upon a national range
of practices in each area. A "0" means only that the activity isn't
being done or isn't planned. It is possible for good programs to decide
not to undertake a specific practice (e.g. rating levels for major
incidents -- question 4.2.1.1) because the benefits to be derived from
doing this are achieved elsewhere (e.g. through very accurate, timely
and non-ambiguous information sharing). The specific criteria are
offered only as examples of grades of improvement and not are
requirements of what must be done to earn a specific score.

General Scoring Guidance:

**[0]{.underline} -- No progress in this area.**

-   Has never been discussed

-   Has been discussed informally but no action has been taken

    **[1]{.underline} -- Very little being done in this area.**

-   Minimal activity, primarily in one agency

-   Issue has been acknowledged and is being investigated

    **[2]{.underline} -- Efforts in this area are moderate. Some good
    processes exist, but they may not be well integrated/coordinate --
    results are mixed.**

-   Has been put into practice on a limited or experimental basis.

-   Some multi-agency agreement cooperation

    **[3]{.underline} -- Efforts in this area are strong and results are
    promising. However, there is still room for improvement.**

-   Has become a generally accepted practice but refinements or changes
    are being discussed or pursued

-   Good multi-agency cooperation but not yet integrated in operations
    of all agencies as "standard procedure"

    **[4]{.underline} -- Efforts in this area are outstanding. There is
    strong integration and coordination with good to excellent
    results.**

-   Excellent coordination and cooperation among agencies

-   Policies and procedures are well integrated in operations of all
    agencies as "standard procedure"

#  

# **4.0 Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Self-Assessment**

# 

Traffic Incident Management relies on the coordination of
multi-jurisdictional, multi-agency resources to ensure that the impacts
of incidents on public safety, traffic flow, and the local economy are
minimized. To maximize TIM efforts, intricate programmatic, operational,
and technical issues need to be addressed. This TIM Self-Assessment
draws on the lessons learned and current practices of successful TIM
programs from across the nation, providing a framework to allow TIM
practitioners to assess their own efforts.

The TIM Self-Assessment consists of three primary assessment areas:

1.  **Program and Institutional Issues**

2.  **Operational Issues**

3.  **Communications and Technology Issues**

The following sections describe these three assessment areas and their
vital components in detail.

## **4.1 Program and Institutional Issues**

Serving as the framework for all TIM efforts, Program and Institutional
Issues are those that address how a program is organized, its objectives
and priorities, agency roles and relationships, resource allocation and
performance measurement. This section contains three subsections
including:

-   Formal Traffic Incident Management Programs (3 questions)

-   TIM Administrative Teams (5 questions)

-   Performance Measurement (4 questions)

    1.  **Formal Traffic Incident Management Programs**

Many agencies participate in Traffic Incident Management programs but no
one agency owns the program. Most incidents are public safety events, so
the primary role of transportation agencies is that of a support nature.
Much coordination is needed among the TIM partners to achieve effective
traffic incident management. On the scene, responders from different
agencies must understand each other's roles, needs, priorities and
operating cultures. At the managerial level, effective program
coordination is needed among the partner agencies to clarify roles,
responsibilities and policies and to effectively plan for and sustain
personnel and equipment resources to conduct the program. This is most
effectively done through a multi-agency strategic planning process in
which short range and long range needs are identified by each
participating agency in cooperation with the other agencies. This
process helps cement and institutionalize coordination at administrative
decision-making levels, making the conduct of each agency's part of the
program at operational levels more successful.

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.1.1.1 Have multi-agency, multi-year strategic plans detailing specific
programmatic activities to be accomplished with appropriate budget and
personnel needs identified?

4.1.1.2 Have formal interagency agreements on operational and
administrative procedures and policies?

4.1.1.3 Have field-level input into the plans ensuring that the plans
will be workable by those responsible for their implementation?

[4.1.1.1 TIM Program Strategic Plans]{.underline}

Traffic incident management is not a core function of any single agency.
DOTs have traditionally focused on construction and maintenance of
roadways and bridges. Highway operations, and traffic incident
management as a support activity, is generally of lower priority in
terms of budget and staffing, often falling in line behind myriad other
maintenance activities. By their very nature, public safety agencies do
include the management of traffic incidents as an agency function, but
only as part of the much larger charge of providing for public safety.

The result is there are often limitations on available departmental
funding for training and equipment specific to traffic incident
management, with departmental resources directed towards activities more
closely aligned to the agencies' core functions. This lack of funding
specifically designated in agency budgets for resources needed to manage
incidents limits the development and retention of traffic incident
management specialists, makes long-term multi-agency planning difficult
at best, and constrains the ability to deploy new equipment and
technologies to meet increasing demands. The likelihood of success can
be increased through the development of dedicated departmental budget
items for traffic incident management in each partner agency and
coordination of these budget initiatives through a program plan for
traffic incident management that is created and agreed to by the partner
agencies.

# 

# TIM programs have varying levels of formalized cooperation and coordination among participating agencies. At a minimum, there are informally established roles and responsibilities based on the working relationships between response personnel. While these arrangements can be very effective, they are also subject to disruption due to changes in personnel, funding uncertainty, or parochial priorities.

Formal programs can overcome these difficulties through interagency
agreements; agreed upon program goals and objectives; formal program
planning processes to meet the program goals and objectives;
pre-established agency roles and responsibilities; and, multi-agency
administrative mechanisms to assure adequate resources to advance
program funding and personnel development.

A key element of a formal TIM program is the development of a TIM
strategic plan listing specific agreed upon program goals and
objectives. Supporting the strategic plan are multi-year program plans
describing specific programmatic activities and projects, resource
requirements, and identifying funding sources. Additionally, annual work
plans form the basis for obtaining budget and personnel needs for each
of the participating agencies.

[4.1.1.2 Interagency Agreements]{.underline}

The various agencies participating in a program to effectively manage
traffic incidents all have different agency goals, perspectives,
responsibilities, priorities, and operating cultures that can cause
misunderstandings, disagreements, delays, and inefficiencies in
effectively resolving a traffic incident. Establishing formal agreements
and memoranda of understanding covering issues where these difficulties
arise can greatly facilitate on-scene operations. Such agreements might
cover subjects like incident command structure, equipment staging,
traffic control, hazardous materials incident issues and procedures,
crash investigation procedures, quick clearance procedures, and many
other issues. Interagency agreements can also set performance goals such
as response time or incident clearance time.

[4.1.1.3 Field-Level Input]{.underline}

An important element in ensuring that the strategic plans are successful
is having those responsible for implementing the plans directly involved
in their development. While high-level commitment is critical, action
plans must make sense to those in the field or the plans will not be
implemented as intended. Involving both high-level and field-level
stakeholders from the beginning ensures realistic plans with buy-in at
all levels.

2.  **TIM Administrative Teams**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.1.2.1 Have formalized TIM multi-agency administrative teams to meet
and discuss administrative policy issues?

4.1.2.2 Hold regular meetings of the TIM administrative team?

4.1.2.3 Conduct training through simulation or "in-field" exercises?

4.1.2.4 Conduct multi-agency post-incident debriefings?

4.1.2.5 Conduct planning for "special events" -- (a) construction and
maintenance; (b) sporting events/concerts/conventions/etc.; (c)
weather-related events; (d) catastrophic events?

Supporting the formal goals and objectives of a TIM program requires
coordination and cooperation among the mid-management and working levels
of the participating agencies.

[4.1.2.1 Formalized TIM Administrative Teams]{.underline}

A formalized multi-agency TIM Administrative Team should be the
mechanism for accomplishing the established goals and objectives of the
program and ensuring its continuity beyond administration and personnel
changes. These multi-agency teams are typically comprised of senior
(mid-to-upper level management) representatives of each of the
participating agencies plus private sector partners. The TIM
Administrative Team differs from a Major Incident Response Team (see
4.2.1.2) in that the Administrative Team is designed to meet away from
the incident scene (a "conference room" team as opposed to a "highway
team"). The agencies represented on both teams are usually the same, but
the individuals representing those agencies may be different on the
Administrative Team versus the Major Incident Response Team. However, in
many instances, the individuals making up the Administrative Team will
also be those on the Major Incident Response Team. This often leads to
greater synergy on both teams as specific individuals work together both
on-scene and off.

[4.1.2.2 Regular TIM Administrative Team Meetings]{.underline}

The team should meet regularly to carry out the program goals and
objectives. The team should have a facilitator that prepares and
distributes an agenda well before the scheduled meeting and affords team
members the opportunity to place items on the agenda for discussion or
action by the team. The team may make changes in procedures where it is
empowered to do so or resolve issues of agency coordination or
understanding that have arisen at past incidents. The team may also
recommend higher-level policy and procedure changes to a high-level
Program Steering Committee for action at the agency level. It may also
develop recommendations for changes in state or local law where needed
to enable better response or to clarify a jurisdictional or policy
issue.

[4.1.2.3 Conduct Training]{.underline}

As part of this team's work, scene planning and training involving the
partner agencies and organizations should be conducted. Administrative
team members should conduct incident simulation, table top or "in-field"
training exercises involving the TIM program partners.

[4.1.2.4 Post-Incident Debriefings]{.underline}

Post-incident debriefings should be held to assess what did and did not
work during recent major incident response. These may be organized
following an incident or as part of the regular meeting of the teams. It
is common for public safety agencies, especially fire and rescue
agencies, to conduct internal agency debriefings of incidents. The
multi-agency debriefing or review should be in addition to any internal
review. It should be conducted at a "neutral facility" in a non-hostile
environment with the intent to examine what can be improved rather than
pointing blame for mistakes.

[4.1.2.5 Special Event Planning]{.underline}

The Administrative Team should also plan for special event incident
response, such as planning for major sporting events, concerts,
conventions and weather-related events. Most major events, especially
those of a repetitive nature, have event coordinators and some form of
organizing team. Transportation management, security, medical response
and traffic incident response are all items that should be addressed by
the TIM team in the planning processes for these events.

3.  **Performance Measurement**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.1.3.1 Have multi-agency agreements on what measures will be tracked
and used to measure program performance?

4.1.3.2 Have agreed upon methods to collect and analyze/track
performance measures?

4.1.3.3 Have established targets for performance in: a) response and b)
clearance?

4.1.3.4 Conduct periodic review of whether or not progress is being made
to achieve targets?

An important aspect in advancing traffic incident management programs is
the ability to accurately measure their effectiveness. Evaluation
metrics provide the necessary feedback to traffic incident management
responders to allow them to improve performance. Equally important, they
provide decision makers with the data to demonstrate the value of
traffic incident management activities and justify their related
expenditures.

In many metropolitan areas, DOTs have established Transportation
Management Centers (TMCs) to coordinate the collection, collation, and
dissemination of traffic and roadway information. These TMCs are
networked to numerous data collection devices in and along the roadways
to monitor traffic flows, weather and roadway conditions, and detect and
locate incidents. Some of these devices and technologies include video
cameras, detectors, radio frequency vehicle identification, and GPS
vehicle tracking. These data can be used to measure the impact of
incidents on traffic flow.

Public safety agencies also collect operational information to gauge
their performance levels and resource utilization. Though traffic
incident management may be a subset of the overall activities of these
agencies, the data collected -- and integrated with other information --
can be used to assess traffic incident management programs. For
instance, police and fire departments often keep computerized,
time-stamped dispatch records and run logs. These data can be used in
assessing response and on-scene times.

Manpower utilization and budget records from agencies can be used to
develop baseline information on the costs of traffic incident management
activities. Satisfaction levels on the part of the motoring public or
partner agencies can be obtained through surveys or polls. DOT motorist
assistance programs can rely on service logs for baseline information.

Whatever measures are used, to be truly effective in advancing a TIM
program, there must agreement on the performance measurements to be
collected and the specific performance targets to be met. The
performance measurements should reflect the specific goals and
objectives described in the TIM strategic plan.

Additionally, periodic evaluation of progress towards achieving the
targets must be conducted.

[4.1.3.1 Multi-Agency Agreements on Performance Measures]{.underline}

Many agencies track performance data to measure their performance toward
meeting goals and objectives of their agencies. Measuring performance
for a Traffic Incident Management Program requires collecting program
performance data that may be different than agency-specific performance
data. When TIM program performance objectives are developed, program
measures of performance involving all participating parties should be
developed to evaluate progress in achieving the program's objectives.

[4.1.3.2 Collection and Analysis of Performance Data]{.underline}

After measures of program performance are defined it is necessary to
specify what data will be used to measure each objective, how it will be
collected and analyzed, and who will do the work. It is likely that no
one agency's data will have all of the information needed about an
incident to track the various performance objectives. It may be
necessary to electronically combine and harmonize data from different
agencies. It may also be necessary to define specific measures ("What is
an "incident?" What kinds of incidents will be tracked?, When does the
incident begin and end and whose "clock" will be used?) and methods to
identify the same incident from disparate agency databases.

[4.1.3.3 Targets for Performance]{.underline}

Some regions are now establishing targets for performance for traffic
incident management that specify response to or clearance of all
incidents within a specified time frame. Several areas, for instance,
have recently stated goals of clearing all incidents within 90 minutes.
Such goals can be highly controversial and even political. It is
important to understand that these goals are not meant to encourage
reckless actions. It is not difficult to imagine a hazmat incident, even
one handled efficiently, that takes considerably longer than 90 minutes
to clear. The purpose of these goals is to encourage multi-agency
reviews of the processes in play at an incident to see where procedural
changes or coordination of activities at the incident can reduce
clearance time.

[4.1.3.4 Periodic Review of Progress]{.underline}

Performance measures are useful only if the data collected are analyzed
and reported in a meaningful and timely manner to a program
administrative team and a program steering committee. The program
reviews based upon tracked data may indicate which program initiatives
are succeeding and which need to be bolstered or modified.

# **4.2 Operational Issues**

### Operational Issues addresses the policies, procedures, and processes used in the field while responding to an incident. Designed to maximize safety and reduce response and clearance times, Operational Issues are the nuts and bolts of a TIM program. This section contains three subsections including:

1.  Procedures for Major Incidents (4 questions)

2.  Responder and Motorist Safety (4 questions)

3.  Response and Clearance Policies and Procedures (6 questions)

**4.2.1 Procedures for Major Incidents**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.2.1.1 Have established criteria for what is a "major incident" --
incident levels or codes?

4.2.1.2 Identify high ranking agency members available on 24/7 basis to
respond to a major incident (Major Incident Response Team)?

4.2.1.3 Have a pre-identified (approved) contact list of resources
(including special equipment) for incident clearance and hazardous
materials response?

4.2.1.4 Have the response equipment pre-staged for timely response?

Anecdotal stories abound about dealing with multi-hour road closures due
to a hazardous materials spill or a multi-vehicle pile-up. Without
question, these "major" incidents present the greatest challenge to even
the most organized TIM program.

[4.2.1.1 Definition of Incident Levels or Severity]{.underline}

Some areas have found it helpful to responding agencies to classify
incidents according to criteria defining 3 or 4 levels of severity. A
Level 1 incident might be a disabled vehicle or a non-blocking incident,
while a Level 4 incident might be a fatal crash or a major hazmat
incident. Each level defines different levels of severity to responding
agencies even before they reach the site. The levels might also define
different traffic management procedures or imply different lengths of
expected incident duration, traffic impact, and resources needed.

[4.2.1.2 Major Incident Response Teams]{.underline}

One effective way to mitigate the effects of a major incident is to have
a designated Major Incident Response Team. Made up of senior-level
agency members from all concerned agencies, this team is available on a
24/7 basis to respond to a major incident. The members of the team
should be high enough in rank or position to lead their agencies forces
on-scene and command that additional resources from their agencies be
brought to the scene without obtaining approval from higher-ranking
officials in their agency. There is also an advantage in having the same
people involved in command at an incident scene. Over time, these
persons develop a trust and respect for each other's abilities, judgment
and knowledge.

[4.2.1.3 Resource Lists]{.underline}

Another important way to mitigate the effects of a major incident and to
speed up clearance is to have a pre-identified contact list of persons
and equipment resources (including special equipment) for incident
clearance and hazardous materials response.

[4.2.1.4 Pre-Staged Equipment]{.underline}

To further expedite clearance, the equipment can be pre-staged for
timely access. Equipment should be catalogued, its location known to
responders, and means of bringing it to the scene arranged (e.g..
standard trailer hooks on various types of responding vehicles from
different agencies). It is also important to have traffic control
equipment (signs, cones, flares, arrow boards, portable dynamic message
signs, etc.) staged in strategic locations so that can be quickly
accessed and brought to the incident.

**4.2.2 Responder and Motorist Safety**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.2.2.1 Train all responders in traffic control procedures?

4.2.2.2 Utilize on-scene traffic control procedures for various levels
of incidents in compliance with MUTCD?

4.2.2.3 Utilize traffic control procedures for the end of the incident
traffic queue?

4.2.2.4 Have mutually understood equipment staging and emergency
lighting procedures on-site to maximize traffic flow past an incident
while providing responder safety?

Emergency responders are at risk from traffic as they work an incident
scene. Having formalized procedures for managing traffic flows through
and around an incident area; ensuring responders have adequate training
in emergency traffic flow management, proper use of emergency lighting,
and emergency vehicle positioning; and, ensuring they have and use
reflective clothing and traffic diversion devices such as flares and
cones can all greatly reduce responder exposure.

Additionally, motorists moving through and upstream from a traffic
incident site are vulnerable to secondary incidents caused by sudden
slowing of traffic, lane changes, and the situation or movement of
emergency vehicles. Proper traffic control procedures at the site and
upstream can significantly reduce the chances of secondary incidents.
Approaches to safely controlling traffic flow include:

-   moving the initial point of traffic contact upstream from the
    incident site;

-   providing notification of incidents to drivers via radio or
    changeable message signs;

-   coordinating detour route signalization to ensure smooth traffic
    flow; or,

-   expanding capacity at the site by use of equipment staging practices
    to keep lanes open or being prepared to open them quickly when no
    longer needed for incident clearance or safety.

[4.2.2.1 Train All Responders in Traffic Control Procedures]{.underline}

The first responders to arrive on the scene of a traffic incident often
have to deal with chaotic situations to stabilize a potential dangerous
scene and then to establish the initial on-scene traffic control. The
first arriving responders are usually a single law enforcement officer
or a fire and rescue unit that have not been trained in traffic control.
The initial placement of equipment or traffic control devices such as
cones and flares often establish traffic control at the scene for the
duration of the incident. It is important that all persons responding to
traffic incidents be trained in traffic control principles to increase
their safety and the safety of the motoring public.

[4.2.2.2 Use MUTCD Traffic Control Procedures]{.underline}

The Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) has long been an
established national standard for the use of traffic control devices
such as signs, signals, and pavement markings and for traffic control
procedures. The MUTCD is well known among traffic and transportation
professionals, but much less so among public safety and private sector
responding professionals. Part 6 of the MUTCD (Temporary Traffic
Control) was formerly dedicated to work zones, but now contains
requirements for traffic control for incidents. The 2003 edition of the
MUTCD includes a new Chapter 6-I that more specially describes traffic
control concepts for traffic incident scenes. It is important that
responders in charge of traffic control at an incident scene understand
the requirements of the MUTCD and that the traffic control procedures
prescribed in the MUTCD be applied at the scene of traffic incidents.

[4.2.2.3 Traffic Control at the End of the Queue]{.underline}

There are two critical locations for traffic control with each incident.
One is at the incident scene itself where clear understand direction is
needed to move traffic safely past the incident and protect responders
working on the incident. The second is at the end of the queue of
traffic that forms beginning at the incident and extends back sometimes
for many miles. The length of the queue depends on the magnitude of
traffic volume (which varies by time of the day), the number of lanes
blocked, and the attraction of the incident scene to passers-by
("rubbernecking"). A minor shoulder incident during off-peak hours may
not create a traffic queue at all. A major incident blocking several
lanes during peak hours may create a very long queue. Drivers
approaching the end of a short queue may see the incident. Drivers
approaching the end of a long queue may be several miles from the
incident and may be taken by surprise by a sudden slowing of traffic.
Approximately 20 percent of all incidents are secondary in nature, with
most of these being near the end of the traffic queue. Secondary
incidents in high-speed traffic can be severe, even fatal. It is
important to monitor the end of the traffic queue and move the first
traffic control and warning to approaching motorists as the length of
the queue grows.

[4.2.2.4 Equipment Staging and Emergency Lighting
Procedures]{.underline}

Undue delays in traffic flow (increasing the likelihood of secondary
incidents) are often caused by equipment or vehicles not being used for
work at the incident scene blocking lanes that could be used for
traffic. It is important to have staging procedures, either on-site or
off-site, for arriving vehicles and equipment so that the equipment can
access the scene, be used at the scene, and be removed when no longer
needed to open traffic lanes when safe to do so.

Emergency vehicle lighting provides warning to approaching vehicles but
provides very little positive traffic control. Indeed, excessive
lighting from numerous response vehicles, especially at night, can be
confusing to motorists and can even degrade scene safety. The use of
emergency vehicle lighting is a contentious issue which is
understandable given that the leading cause of on- duty death among law
enforcement officers (and a major cause among fire-rescue personnel) is
traffic crashes, both on-scene and in response. In recent years there
has been increasing interest shown in public safety organizations for
investigating policies that reduce emergency lighting at traffic
incidents after the scene is secured and good traffic control is in
place. Procedures for the use of emergency lighting on-scene should be
developed reducing the use of emergency lighting as much as possible
while still providing adequate warning to approaching motorists.

**4.2.3 Response and Clearance Policies and Procedures**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.2.3.1 Utilize the Incident Command System?

4.2.3.2 Have specific policies and procedures for fatal accident
investigation that also address maintenance of traffic flow?

4.2.3.3 Have specific policies and procedures for hazardous materials
response that also address maintenance of traffic flow?

4.2.3.4 Have quick clearance policies?

4.2.3.5 Have a pre-qualified list of available and contracted towing and
recovery operators (to include operators' capabilities)?

4.2.3.6 Use motorist assist service patrols?

[4.2.3.1 Incident Command]{.underline}

Crucial to the safe and timely clearance of traffic incidents is
coordination of response resources from the DOT, public safety
responders, private-sector contractors, etc. This requires a clear
command hierarchy, designated responder roles and responsibilities,
clear procedures, and the ability of all responders to communicate
clearly and effectively throughout the response and clearance processes.
The Incident Command System (ICS), also known as the Incident Management
System (IMS),provides the framework for the command, control and
coordination of resources at the scene of an emergency; and, provides a
management tool consisting of procedures for organizing personnel,
facilities, equipment, and communications at the scene of an incident.
It is an objective-based system that emphasizes common terminology,
integrated communications systems, and comprehensive resource management
across response organizations.

[4.2.3.2 Investigation of Fatal Crashes]{.underline}

Investigation of fatal incidents can result in road closures and delayed
road openings. Existing policies may require certification of death by a
medical examiner before bodies can be moved and the scene cleared.
Careful planning and mutually accepted policies and procedures for fatal
crash investigation can mean increased scene clearance time and traffic
flow restoration, while protecting the scene for investigation and
respecting the rights of the deceased and their families. Mutual
training will enable other responders to identify and preserve evidence
and enable the maintenance of traffic flow past the incident without
jeopardizing the investigation.

Even technology can play a role, such as in the case of photogrammetry
that allows investigators to quickly document the incident scene with
three-dimensional digital photography that can be reviewed in detail
after the incident has been cleared.

[4.2.3.3 Hazardous Materials Procedures]{.underline}

Effective first response to an incident involving hazardous materials
(hazmat) is critical to minimizing the impacts of the incident in terms
of public and responder safety, environmental degradation, and costs for
clean up. Well-defined hazmat response policies and procedures and
responder training allow first responders to accurately identify the
hazardous material and direct further response. For certain spills,
equipment carried in the first response vehicles can be used to contain
the spills until the fire department or hazmat contractor can arrive at
the scene.

While some materials are extremely hazardous in any quantity, hazardous
materials response procedures are frequently invoked when a gasoline or
diesel fuel spill exceeds a legally specified amount, typically 25
gallons. Some states have adopted procedures that exempt larger spills
of engine fluids (gasoline, diesel fuel, oil, anti-freeze, etc.) from
hazardous materials response procedures, providing the spill has been
contained on the pavement. The USDOT regulations and guidelines for
hazardous materials apply only to materials being transported, not
engine fluids. Quick cleanup and removal of engine fluid spills can
greatly reduce incident duration time.

[4.2.3.4 Quick Clearance Policies]{.underline}

Quick clearance polices generally focus on the timely and prudent
clearance of incidents involving commercial vehicles. Incidents
involving these larger vehicles carrying a wide variety of freight types
have the potential for closing roadways for extended periods of time.
Several traffic incident management programs have legal mechanisms in
place to sacrifice the freight load or vehicle in order to open the
roadways. Many transportation and law enforcement officials are
reluctant to take aggressive action by pushing or dragging heavy damaged
vehicles and cargoes off the road for fear of liability. Experience has
shown, however, that agencies that take aggressive actions do not incur
increased liability, especially if aggressive clearance in the name of
public safety is a stated policy and if the clearance is done in a
manner that is not reckless or negligent. These policies are tempered by
such considerations as the potential for hazards associated with the
load and the availability of appropriate towing and recovery equipment
and personnel.

About half of the states have laws that require drivers involved in
minor property damage crashes (no injuries) to move their vehicles, if
they can be driven, to a safe location out of traffic lanes. These laws,
generally called "Move It", or "Steer It, Clear It" laws, are very
helpful not only in quickly opening traffic lanes, but also increasing
the safety of motorists who are often tempted to get out of their
vehicles to talk to each other, inspect damage and exchange insurance
information. The driving public is largely unaware of these laws or what
their actions should be following a minor crash and for insurance
reasons drivers will often want to leave their vehicles where they
collided until law enforcement arrives on the scene. A strong continuing
public education program is needed with these laws to make drivers aware
of the laws and their responsibilities and to educate new drivers.

Quick clearance policies can also include immediate tow-away policies,
especially in proximity to metropolitan areas, to ensure the timely
removal of disabled vehicles from roadway shoulders. This reduces the
potential for moving traffic colliding with parked vehicles. Removal of
the vehicles is typically at the expense of the owners. However,
increasingly many of these vehicles are derelicts, abandoned by their
owners. Once towed, these abandoned vehicles can become a financial
burden to tow companies who have to store, and then scrap them. Working
with the towing and recovery companies on development of traffic
incident management policies helps mitigate these financial impacts.

[4.2.3.5 Towing and Recovery]{.underline}

Towing and recovery operations clear the roadway of disabled or damaged
vehicles and their cargoes restoring the roadway to it full capacity.
Timely dispatch of appropriate towing and recovery assets to an incident
scene can be facilitated through a contact list of towing and recovery
companies who have been pre-approved regarding equipment and
capabilities. Towing and recovery services are usually contacted through
law enforcement agencies that have rotational agreements or contracts
with towing and recovery companies. Most towing companies can adequately
handle passenger sized vehicles and vans. Larger trucks, especially
those that have overturned require the expertise of recovery
specialists. Rotational and other types of contracts for towing and
recovery services must assure that the correct equipment is brought to
the scene and that the specialists are qualified for the task at hand.
It is important to let the towing and recovery professionals know as
much as possible about the nature of the vehicles involved so they can
bring the correct equipment. In many areas, the towing and recovery
companies are working with law enforcement and fire-rescue agencies in
mutual education activities so that vehicle and cargo removal proceeds
swiftly and safely. The Towing and Recovery Association of America
(TRAA) has developed a three level National Driver Certification Program
to establish a higher level of professionalism in their industry.
Certified towing and recovery specialists also have greater professional
credibility with other responders and an increasing number of law
enforcement agencies that contract with towers are now requiring TRAA
certification as a qualification for participation in a contractual
relationship.

[4.2.3.6 Motorists Assistance -- Service Patrols]{.underline}

Motorist assistance programs are widely used to help stranded motorists.
These programs feature mobile service patrols that travel the highways
and render assistance where needed. The service patrols often push
disabled vehicles off the road, provide gasoline, change flat tires, or
provide minor repairs to allow the motorist to safely drive the vehicle
from the highway. If the vehicle cannot be moved, the service patrols
can contact tow companies for the motorist. The service patrols can be
provided as a public service usually provided by a transportation
agency, or by private companies, either as a contracted service for a
public agency or as a free promotional activity or for a fee.

Service patrols help assure that stranded motorists don't stay
"stranded" and that the travel lanes and shoulders are kept clear. They
are also an extra set of eyes and ears for other incidents and often can
provide traffic control or communications assistance at the scene of a
larger incident.

# **4.3 Communication and Technology Issues**

Careful planning for incident response and expedited on-scene procedures
will not achieve the desired results if communication among agencies,
responders and the motoring public is not present. Communication, and
the technology to facilitate it, is a critical part of any Traffic
Incident Management Program.

Traffic incidents can cause major disruptions to transportation
facilities and so corridor or area wide traffic management is essential
to mitigate effects of an incident. The Intelligent Transportation
Systems (ITS) technologies enable effective management of freeway and
arterial street traffic in response to an incident. The traveler also
must understand what lies ahead. Good reliable, up-to-date traveler
information will allow a motorist to assess the consequences of staying
with the originally intended route, and the choices open for diversion
to other routes or even, in some cases, to other modes of travel.

### This section contains three subsections including:

> 1\. Integrated Interagency Communications (2 questions)
>
> 2\. Transportation Management Systems (3 questions)
>
> 3\. Traveler Information (3 questions)

**4.3.1 Integrated Interagency Communications**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.3.1.1. Have a two-way interagency voice communications system allowing
for direct on-site communications between incident responders?

4.3.1.2. Provide data and video information transfer between agencies
and applications (TMC-CAD integration)?

[4.3.1.1 Two-Way Voice Communications]{.underline}

At an incident site, voice communications among the diverse response
agencies have historically been hampered by lack of direct connectivity
between their discrete communications systems. Methods of integrating
these communications systems to allow on-site direct communications
between incident responders, regardless of their legacy systems, are
advancing. Trunked radio systems provide a partial solution to this
problem. In recent years a large number of options have become available
for sending voice and free text messages over a host of media including
radio, cellular telephone and Internet services.

[4.3.1.2 TMC-CAD Integration -- Data and Video]{.underline}

Most traffic incidents are first detected by means of a cellular
telephone call (911, #77, \*SP, etc.) that is received at a Public
Safety Answering Point (PSAP). The information is then routed to the
appropriate public safety dispatcher (law enforcement, fire-rescue,
medical, etc.) for response. That information about the incident does
not go to transportation management centers (TMC). Where they exist, the
TMCs are usually left to find out about the incident through their own
devices, usually several minutes later. The TMCs have traffic and
transportation related information that would be important to public
safety responders both to enable quicker response and also to manage the
incident scene more effectively. That information rarely gets to public
safety agencies. Towing and recovery companies are left out of the loop
entirely except for voice communications with law enforcement. It is not
too unusual now to see a police computer-aided dispatch (CAD) terminal
in a TMC, but to date true data integration is virtually non-existent.
There is strong interest and some actual progress being made in data
integration between TMC databases and public safety CAD databases,
working through the data security issues to provide true two-way data
communication among public safety and transportation agencies.

**4.3.2 Transportation Management Systems**

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.3.2.1 Use Traffic Management Center(s) to coordinate incident
notification and response?

4.3.2.2 Have a developed technical infrastructure for surveillance and
rapid detection of traffic incidents?

4.3.2.3 Have specific policies and procedures for traffic management
during incident response (i.e. signal timing changes, opening/closing of
HOV lanes/ramp metering)?

### 

[4.3.2.1 Traffic Management Centers]{.underline}

The use of technology for the detection, verification, and clearance of
highway incidents has increased dramatically over the last decade. In
metropolitan areas, the use of video cameras, loop detectors, Global
Positioning Systems (GPS) on probe vehicles, and cellular telephone use
by the motoring public have all dramatically reduced the time to detect
and verify an incident. These technologies have also improved the
richness of the information available to incident managers, allowing
them to better direct resources to the problem.

Many major metropolitan areas have established Traffic Management (or
Operations) Centers (TMCs) to receive, collate, and direct information
to incident responders and the motoring public. Dedicated DOT personnel
staff these TMCs and to a limited but increasing degree, personnel from
police and fire departments are co-located at the facility to improve
information sharing and traffic incident management coordination. In
some cases, public safety dispatch for traffic incidents is conducted by
public safety personnel located at a TMC. In these cases, public safety
computer-aided dispatch information can be shared with DOT personnel,
and CCTV images and data are provided to the public safety personnel to
facilitate dispatching and to brief responders prior to arrival to an
incident scene.

[4.3.2.2 Technical Infrastructure for Surveillance and
Detection]{.underline}

Effective traffic management relies on an effective and efficient
traffic surveillance system of detectors to monitor traffic volumes and
speeds on the road network. The traffic detection system is usually
supplemented by television (CCTV) cameras to provide visual confirmation
of network conditions. Personnel in a TMC usually do not monitor cameras
on a continual basis and rely on alarms from the traffic detector
network to alert them to traffic incidents. The data from traffic
detectors is smoothed through computer algorithms to filter out false
alarms, but this smoothing process usually delays automated detection of
an incident by a TMC for several minutes. The sharing of electronic
fusion of CAD-TMC data would provide much quicker detection of incidents
for the TMC and much quicker location and verification of traffic
incidents for public safety and transportation responders.

[4.3.2.3 Traffic Management Policies and Procedures for Traffic
Incidents]{.underline}

There are usually a large number of traffic management options to
consider after the occurrence of an incident, not only to manage traffic
immediately impacted by the incident, but also to manage traffic in a
wider area that may be ultimately impacted. These options also are
important to responders, both to enable their response and to manage the
incident scene more effectively. Actions such as opening and closing
freeway ramps, opening and closing HOV facilities, use of service or
frontage roads, use of arterial streets for freeway diversion and
resulting traffic control needs to handle the extra traffic volume, need
to discussed in an administrative team setting and planned so that they
can be quickly implemented when needed. Larger incidents can impact
transportation facilities over very large areas. The closing of a major
facility for several hours may necessitate the implementation of
alternative traffic management procedures in adjacent jurisdictions or
states many miles away from the incident scene.

### 4.3.3 Traveler Information

**Assessment Questions**

Does your TIM program:

4.3.3.1 Have the ability to merge/integrate and interpret information
from multiple sources?

4.3.3.2 Have a real-time motorist information system providing
incident-specific information?

4.3.3.3 Provide motorists with travel time estimates for route segments?

Providing incident information to the motoring public can dramatically
reduce the impact of highway incidents on traffic movement by allowing
motorists to take alternate travel routes, change departure times, or
otherwise modify their travel plans to avoid incidents. Common
technologies and methods used to provide incident information to the
public and divert traffic include:

-   predetermined alternate routes;

-   distribution of traffic incident information to radio and television
    outlets;

-   dynamic message signs along the roadways;

-   highway advisory radio broadcasts;

-   traveler information internet sites;

-   pager and broadcast fax alerts; and,

-   traveler information telephone numbers.

[4.3.3.1 Use of Information from Multiple Sources]{.underline}

There are an increasing number of private sector information service
providers (ISP) in business to provide traveler information to
subscribers and to media outlets. Many of these ISPs also have their own
traffic monitoring equipment to supplement information from public
sector sources. Information that comes into a TMC may be automated
(traffic detectors) or voice (verbal information from callers or from
service patrols or law enforcement sources. Private ISPs should be part
of a traffic incident management program since the information they have
is vital to providing accurate and timely information to travelers about
dynamic traffic situations. The ability to collect and fuse traffic data
from a number of sources and provide a coherent picture to travelers is
important to a traffic incident management program.

[4.3.3.2 Real-time Motorist Information System with Incident-Specific
Information]{.underline}

Many media outlets are oriented to the news value of an incident,
particularly a spectacular one, and do not provide information that
motorists can use to make good decisions about the use of alternate
routes. Media information usually describes the general location of the
incident, but often ignores specifics about what ramps or streets are
impacted. Information typically does not describe the effect of the
incident. A reporter may say that traffic is "stop-and-go" but usually
does not say how far back the delay (or traffic queue) goes from the
incident. Information, particularly that ISPs provide, should provide
information about what facilities are impacted and how serous that
impact is. If specific direction is not provided on alternate routes,
the motorists who are familiar with the area can make more informed
decisions on whether to divert to a different route.

[4.3.3.3 Provide Travel Time Information]{.underline}

It is common to see message on dynamic highway message signs that say
"Congestion Ahead", or "Accident at X, Expect Delays". These messages
are perhaps better than no notification at all, but provide very little
useful information. Research has shown that motorists prefer predictable
travel times to shorter delay free travel in major urban areas, given
that delay free travel is virtually impossible. Drivers very quickly
become accustomed to travel time information if it is provided.
Providing such information is within the capability of most automated
traffic management systems.

**Next Steps**

The assessment is complete and you now have a score for your corridor,
region or state. Essentially you have established a benchmark for your
TIM activities and identified those areas where improvement may be
needed.

Those topic areas receiving the lowest scores may need additional
resources brought to bear. For those topic areas for which there was
strong dissent on the score, more TIM team building may be indicated.
Whatever the case, it is recommended that you utilize your area's score
as a means to improving your overall TIM program.

Not intended as a one-time exercise, this TIM Self-Assessment should be
conducted on an annual or biannual basis. This will provide a consistent
measure of your improvement and allow for continual refocusing of
resources to those areas needing them most. You may find the score in
one area actually decreases over time, indicating a lapse of attention
to that particular area. And again, divergent opinions on the score for
a particular topic area should signal a need for additional team
exercises to ensure all stakeholder opinions are considered and valued
in the process.

For additional resources on where to go for help in a particular topic
area, see the Appendix.

**APPENDIX A**

**ADDITIONAL RESOURCES**

Traffic Incident Management Handbook - November 2000

<http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/rept_mis/@9201!.pdf>

Regional Traffic Incident Management Programs - Implementation Guide
(2001)

<http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/@5901!.PDF>

Incident Management Successful Practices - A Cross-Cutting Study (2000)\
<http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/8V001!.PDF>

Framework for Developing Incident Management Systems - Revised 1995

[http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/26201!.PDF](http://wwwcf.fhwa.dot.gov/exit.cfm?link=http://www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov//JPODOCS/REPTS_TE/26201!.PDF)

National Traffic Incident Management Conference Proceedings

<http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Travel/IncidentMgmt/timconf/TIMCnfPr.htm>

FHWA Traffic Incident Management Web Site

<http://www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/Travel/IncidentMgmt/IncidentMgmt.htm>

ITS Public Safety Program Web Site

<http://www.its.dot.gov/pubsafety/index.htm>

Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) Web Site

[http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov](http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/)

**Appendix B**

**Facilitator Guide**

**Background and Purpose**

The Traffic Incident Management (TIM) Self Assessment (SA) is a tool to
be used by state and regional program managers to assess their
achievement of a successful multi-agency program to manage traffic
incidents effectively and safely. The tool also provides a method to
assess gaps and needs in existing multi-agency regional and statewide
efforts to mitigate congestion caused by traffic incidents.

The TIM SA consists of a series of questions designed to allow those
with traffic incident management responsibilities to evaluate program
performance in specific organizational and procedural categories.
Conducted as a group exercise, the TIM SA provides a format for
discussion among the group members aimed toward reaching a consensus on
various aspects of a traffic incident management program. This process
provides a medium for enhanced communication between TIM stakeholders to
identify specific areas or activities by which the multi-agency
management of traffic incidents can be improved.

The ratings can then be tallied to provide an overall TIM score for the
program. Areas for possible improvement can be identified through
individual question ratings. While the score provides a metric for
measurement, the most important information will be derived from the
discussion of the assessment among the participants. This discussion
will provide local agencies valuable information to form or improve a
multi-agency program for traffic incident management.

The purpose of this Facilitator Guide is to provide the TIM SA
facilitator or facilitating agency with enough background and
instruction to prepare for the conduct of the assessment, and to assure
its successful completion. Among the issues addressed are:

-   Pre-Meeting Preparations

-   Meeting Facilitation Strategies

-   Post-Meeting Actions

**A. Pre-Meeting Preparations**

The first step as the facilitator is to become familiar with the TIM SA
Guide and Scoring Template. If you are new to traffic incident
management, there are a number of helpful references found in Appendix
A. You should have a working knowledge of the TIM terms and references
cited throughout the TIM SA Guide. Familiarity with TIM will allow you
to better target the appropriate participants and to facilitate the
group discussions.

As detailed in the Guide, the TIM SA is designed to be conducted as a
group exercise. There are a number of stakeholder groups involved in TIM
and, at minimum, each assessment should include representatives from the
following:

-   State and local transportation departments

    -   Operations

    -   Maintenance

-   State and local law enforcement

-   Fire and rescue

-   Emergency Medical Services (especially if not part of fire and
    rescue)

-   Private sector response contractors

    -   Towing and recovery

    -   Hazardous materials response contractors

To broaden the input and perspective, other groups that could be invited
to participate include:

-   Traffic reporting media

-   Private sector providers of traffic information for motorists

-   Associations representing roadway users

    -   Automobile clubs

    -   Trucking associations

While the size of the group will be dictated by the geographic area
being assessed, it is recommended that the assessment be conducted with
no less than five participants and no more than 20.

Again, depending on the geographic area being assessed and the
subsequent size of the group, conduct of the assessment will take
anywhere from three to five hours. It is recommended that a minimum of
three hours be scheduled for the assessment, as anything less will not
allow participants a chance to thoroughly discuss each of the program
areas.

Pick a location easily accessible by a majority of participants. The
meeting room should be set up conference-style to allow for maximum
interaction among participants. It is a good idea to provide table tents
for participants to write their name on, both for ease of the
facilitator and for the other participants. While many in the group may
know each other from their work in TIM, others may be relatively new to
the group. If the TIM SA PowerPoint slides are going to be used,
audiovisual equipment will need to be provided. This will also enable
you to project the score sheet as you conduct the meeting. It is also a
good idea to provide refreshments or at least let participants know
where they are available.

You should send out the TIM SA materials in advance, so the assessment
will need to be scheduled far enough in advance to give participants
time to review the materials and complete the assessment on their own.
After identifying the appropriate individuals to invite, sending out the
official invitation and accompanying materials a month in advance should
allow enough time for their review and completion.

The TIM SA Guide and Scoring Template should be sent to all invitees in
advance. If you plan on using the TIM SA PowerPoint slides, you may want
to send those to the invitees in advance as well.

Participants should be asked to read the TIM SA Guide, consider the
questions, and score each based on their understanding of the level of
success in each topic area. This can be facilitated by sending an
electronic version of the Scoring Template to each participant and
asking that they complete it and return to you in advance. Doing so will
allow scores for each question to be tallied and used as the basis for
discussion of each question at the assessment. Encourage participants to
bring their individual score sheets to the assessment for reference.

However, if participants are unlikely or unwilling to complete the
Scoring Template in advance, request that they at least review the TIM
SA Guide and become familiar with the questions. Explain that doing so
will facilitate the discussion at the assessment, ultimately saving them
time.

While the Guide explains the purpose and objective of the TIM SA, it is
helpful to reiterate several points in the cover letter sent with the
materials.

-   The TIM SA will prove most valuable and lead to the greatest
    improvements if it is conducted as a true group exercise, inclusive
    of all TIM stakeholders. **Everyone's input is important!**

-   This is not a competition to see which corridor, region or state can
    achieve the highest score. Furthermore, the assessment is not meant
    to measure or test any one agency's response. The scoring done in
    advance of the meeting should represent your views on how all TIM
    stakeholders work together, not how you view your particular
    agency's success. **An honest assessment of your program's success,
    or lack thereof, in each area will provide the clearest guidance on
    where resources need to be targeted.**

-   The numeric score is less important than the consensus building done
    in reaching that score. **Let's agree on where we need to
    concentrate our efforts and commit to working together in those
    areas.**

**B. Meeting Facilitation Strategies**

Your service as facilitator will not allow you time to take adequate
notes of the discussion and record the significant points made or
concerns raised. Therefore, it is strongly recommended that you assign a
staff person to serve as recorder. While verbatim notes are not
necessary, capturing the essence of the discussion on each question will
provide sufficient detail for follow-up discussion and action. As the
TIM SA is intended to be an ongoing exercise, completed at least every
other year or more often if desired, these notes will serve as the basis
for discussion in subsequent iterations of the TIM SA, when participants
can gauge if they have addressed the concerns raised and realized
improvement as a result.

After your welcome, introduction and mention of any housekeeping items,
participants should be asked to introduce themselves and briefly
describe their involvement in traffic incident management. Pass around a
sign-up sheet to collect contact information on all participants.

Before starting in on the questions, you may want to again describe the
objective of the TIM SA, reiterating the points above on the importance
of 1) valuing everyone's opinion; 2) providing honest assessments of the
program's success or lack thereof in each area; and, 3) focusing more on
consensus building rather than achieving a high score.

It is also helpful to explain each of the three assessment areas in more
detail, utilizing either the TIM SA PowerPoint slides or the
descriptions in the Guide.

-   **Program and Institutional Issues**

-   **Operational Issues**

-   **Communications and Technology Issues**

You will also need to explain the Scoring Template, carefully reviewing
the range of activity required for each score. For instance, a question
scoring a 1 may mean that only one agency is minimally involved in that
activity or it may mean that, while no one agency is involved in the
activity, it has been acknowledged by one or more agencies and is being
investigated.

You can and should put participants at ease by reminding them that the
Scoring Template, and indeed the entire TIM SA exercise, is not meant to
measure any one agency's success, but rather is meant as an assessment
of how all the TIM partners work together. The FHWA will publish only
national summary reports of the TIM Self Assessment. This summary report
will not contain state or urban area scores but will report only
national average scores and score distributions.

You can now start in on the individual questions. Begin with an overall
explanation of what the question is asking. If you collected individual
Scoring Templates in advance of the session and have tallied the scores,
let the participants know what the range and distribution of the scores
for that question. Ask them for reaction to the scores. Much of the
range in the scores may be due to not clearly understanding the question
or answering it from a narrower agency viewpoint rather than from a
"program" viewpoint. Ask questions and guide discussions to narrow the
range through clarification of the question and by asking participants
to explain why they scored that question the way they did.

These may turn out to be some of the most fruitful discussions of the
entire exercise. For instance, Question 4.2.2.2 asks if your TIM program
"Utilize(s) on-scene traffic control procedures for various levels of
incidents in compliance with MUTCD?" While the Manual on Uniform Traffic
Control Devices (MUTCD) and its nationally accepted standards for the
use of traffic control devices is well-known among traffic and
transportation professionals, individuals from public safety or from the
private sector may not be aware of the MUTCD and the guidance it
provides incident responders. While they may have scored this question
low based on their lack of knowledge on this specific subject matter,
the subsequent discussion of their score will not only introduce them to
the MUTCD, but also will likely elucidate its value for them and
possibly lead to greater use and acceptance of its standards by all TIM
stakeholders. Likewise, question 4.2.3.1 asks if your TIM program
"Utilize(s) the Incident Command System?" Public safety responders,
especially those in fire and rescue agencies, operate under ICS (or IMS)
as a matter of course and would tend to rate this question highly from
their agency's viewpoint. Others who are not familiar with ICS would
rate the question lower. The discussion should strive to reach consensus
among the group on how well ICS is understood and used as a command and
control protocol by all responders at incident scenes.

If Scoring Templates have not been collected in advance, you will need
to "poll" the group and lead the discussion toward development of a
consensus score for each question. Start with an explanation of the
question and then ask for opinions from the group. The initial
discussion may show a large range in the scores due primarily to
agency-oriented viewpoints. It will be very important that you recognize
each constituency so that a true consensus can be reached. Clarify that
the goal is to reach a multi-agency program score rather than one that
reflects the perspectives of individual agencies. Strong dissent by one
group or person should be noted in the minutes so that particular issue
can be dealt with at future TIM team meetings or TIM SA sessions.

There are strategies you can employ to draw out responses from each of
the participants. By actively questioning participants and probing them
for responses, you may reach consensus that otherwise would have eluded
your group. When participants respond to your question, you can ask for
more detail to help build understanding and group consensus. For each
answer offered, consider asking the following questions:

-   Do all TIM stakeholders have the same response regarding this issue?

-   What steps has each group taken to address these issues?

-   What are the implications of these issues for each stakeholder
    group?

-   What are some strategies that could be adopted to address these
    issues?

-   Do the strategies offered and their applicability to the situation
    differ by stakeholder group?

At the conclusion, assuming your recorder has utilized the electronic
version of the Scoring Template, you will have arrived at an overall
consensus score for the session. Ask participants for any final
reactions to that score and any closing thoughts they may have on the
assessment exercise.

Describe possible next steps and get participant recommendations on the
course of action to take. Is there a formal TIM team that can now
address those program areas with the lower scores or is now the time to
form such a team out of the stakeholder groups present? Is a
subcommittee needed to start planning TIM strategies for some of the
special events referenced in Question 4.1.2.5 under TIM Administrative
Teams? Have the responses in Traveler Information revealed a need to
focus more on informing the public? Use the discussion as a guide for
developing an action plan.

In closing, thank the participants for their time and commitment to the
process. It is recommended that participants be involved in follow-up
review and comment on the assessment. Let the participants know that
they will be sent copies of the final assessment Scoring Template and
assessment notes and encourage them to submit any comments they might
have on the assessment results and the process. Encourage their
participation in future TIM activities and subsequent TIM SA sessions.

**C. Post-Meeting Actions**

Prepare the final Scoring Template and assessment notes for distribution
to the participants. It is recommended that you send out and solicit
their final comments from the participants before sending on to FHWA.
Once final, forward your Scoring Template and assessment notes by email
to David Helman at FHWA headquarters.

An After Action report can be prepared with a list of action items
resulting from the assessment exercise. Assignments can be made to
committees or agencies for follow-up on particular action items, or a
subsequent meeting can be scheduled to address those action items. The
idea is to utilize the findings from assessment to target areas where
improvement is needed and to capitalize on the momentum built by the
assessment to put in place action items to address those areas for
improvement.

**D. Where to Go For Help**

Help is available for any questions you may have or assistance you may
need, including:

-   Determining what agencies to invite to participate

-   Contacting the appropriate agencies or individuals within those
    agencies to secure their participation

-   Facilitating the assessment or recording the minutes

-   Determining next steps for the group

**[FHWA Headquarters]{.underline}**

David Helman

\(202\) 366-8042

[**david.helman@fhwa.dot.gov**](mailto:david.helman@fhwa.dot.gov)

**[Resource Center Traffic Incident Management Team]{.underline}**

Greg Jones

\(404\) 562-3906

[**gregm.jones@fhwa.dot.gov**](mailto:gregm.jones@fhwa.dot.gov)

**[TIM SA Contractor]{.underline}**

Rebecca Brewster

\(770\) 432-0628

[**rbrewster@trucking.org**](mailto:rbrewster@trucking.org)

**Appendix C**

**Scoring Guidance for Traffic Incident Management**

**Self Assessment Questions**

The general scoring guidance shown on pages 4-5 of the Guide offers
high-level guidance on how to score each question. This Appendix offers
more specific guidance for each question to assist those assessing their
programs to better evaluate their program performance. These criteria,
while more specific, are also fairly general in that they indicate
various levels of achievement for each question based upon broad
national experience. The specific policies, procedures, institutional
relationships, legal framework and institutional operating cultures vary
widely across the country. Therefore the guidance that follows may only
be marginally helpful in some cases. Therefore, these scoring "criteria"
should be taken only as general guidance of a more specific nature as to
what levels of achievement might define a score. The criteria should not
be interpreted as required actions or status needed to achieve a score.

**[Section 1 -- Program and Institutional Issues]{.underline}**

**Part 4.1.1 -- Formal Traffic Incident Management Programs**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.1.1.1 Have multi-agency, multi-year strategic plans detailing
specific programmatic activities to be accomplished with appropriate
budget and personnel needs identified?***

**0-** There is no effective coordination of TIM activities and issues
at managerial or administrative levels of partner organizations. TIM
does not have any specific work plans or program "roadmaps" even at the
agency level.

1.  There is some program planning in TIM in individual agencies but no
    formal coordination of these activities among partner agencies.

**2-** The issue of multi-agency TIM program planning has been raised
and there are some organizational efforts underway to better coordinate
budget and resource allocations for TIM by the partner agencies.

**3-** Agencies have committed to a strategic planning process for
coordination of activities and resource allocation. Cooperative activity
is underway to bring this process to life, but the process is not fully
formalized and underway. There is, however, a significant amount of
high-level coordination among partner agencies to identify and plan and
budget for TIM resources.

**4-** High levels by a multi-agency strategic planning process that is
reviewed on a regular basis and this process leads to a coordinated
approach to identify and budget for needed resources by the partner
agencies.

***4.1.1.2 Have formal interagency agreements on operational and
administrative procedures and policies?***

1.  There are no "memoranda of understanding" (MOU), mutual-aid
    agreements or any other formal or informal agreements among similar
    (e.g. fire to fire or law enforcement to law enforcement) or
    disparate agencies (e.g. law enforcement to transportation).

2.  There are some mutual-aid agreements, most notably among similar
    public safety agencies in adjoining jurisdictions.

**2-** There are informal (non-binding) agreements among a number of
agencies to actively work toward better coordination at incident scenes
and to improve communications and information sharing. While these
agreements may work well, they are informal and therefore subject to
change with a change in leadership of individual agencies.

**3-** Informal agreements have an "institutional life" and are accepted
in the operational culture of the various agencies. Some of these
agreements have been formalized into signed MOUs or in formal TIM
program structure.

**4-** Agencies are bound operationally by formal agreements and program
structures that ensure a high level of coordination and communication
both at the management and operational levels. These close
relationships, while formalized, are also widely accepted within the
operational cultures of the various agencies.

***4.1.1.3 Have field-level input into the plans ensuring that the plans
will be workable by those responsible for their implementation?***

*Note-Agencies will have different operating cultures. This question
should be scored on whether or not field-level input influences
high-level policies that affect on-scene operations in general and not
necessarily how one agency's culture impacts operations.*

**0-** Decisions leading to operational policies and procedures are
heavily "top-down" and there is little chance for on-scene experience to
filter up to effect changes in policy at high levels.

**1-** There are some opportunities for field input to be accepted and
studied for minor changes, but major policies and procedures are still
rigidly in place and not subject to meaningful review.

**2-** There are some procedures for examining agency policies and
procedures based on field-level input and some changes have been made
based on this input. The procedures for change are entirely internal,
however, and input from other agencies is not usually well received or
acted on.

**3-** There is a process in place to examine and evaluate policies and
procedures from field level or middle management personnel. Input
usually comes from agency representatives on a working level
multi-agency TIM "administrative" team. The process works well for
making minor policy and procedure changes. Significant changes, even if
supported by mid-level staff, are much more difficult to make because of
agency culture and traditions and a perception that the recommended
change is not important if it has originated outside the agency.

**4-** There is a structured process for evaluating TIM policies and
procedures based on input from multi-level working level teams. This
process works well for making both minor and major changes in policies
and procedures. High-level relationships among agencies are strong so
that recommendations that are endorsed by mid-level managers are taken
seriously and studied regardless of the original source of the
recommendation. Changes that improve incident response and clearance and
don't compromise an agency's legally prescribed functions are made.

**Part 4.1.2 -- Traffic Incident Management Administrative Teams**

Does tour traffic incident management program...

***4.1.2.1 Have formalized TIM multi-agency administrative teams to meet
and discuss administrative policy issues?***

**0-** There is no team.

**1-** Representatives of 2 or more agencies meet on an informal and ad
hoc basis to discuss items of mutual interest. Follow-up activities are
difficult to implement because of the lack of upper level interest or
awareness.

**2-** A team has been organized. Facilitation of the meetings is the
responsibility of a staff level person in one agency but this activity
is not well supported or given priority or adequate resources. The
participation of agencies, particularly the public safety agencies, is
not consistent. The perception of the value of the team is mixed.

**3-** A team meets and representation from the various agencies on a
fairly regular basis. Agency representatives are actively engaged in TIM
activities in their organizations. The TIM meeting is facilitated either
by a staff person in one of the agencies or by a consultant, but in
either case the attention and resources given to support the team
meetings is sustained and regarded as important.

**4-** The team is the mechanism, under a formal TIM program, by which
the goals and objectives of the multi-agency strategic plan are carried
on at the working level of each agency. Meetings are well attended by
representatives of a number of agencies. The team does meaningful work
in implementing the TIM program and is highly valued by upper-level
management of the participating agencies.

***4.1.2.2 Hold regular meetings of the TIM administrative team?***

**0-** There is no team and, therefore, no meetings.

**1-** Representatives of 2 or more agencies meet on an informal and ad
hoc basis usually in response to some specific issue or problem.

**2-** Even though the team has been organized, it meets on an irregular
basis and meetings are frequently cancelled in deference to other
"priorities. The frequency of the meetings may depend on waxing and
waning enthusiasm of the participants or of the facilitating agency.

**3-** A team meets on a fairly regular basis. They are regarded as
sufficiently important that they are rarely cancelled without being
rescheduled. Attendance of representatives from various member
organizations is reliable and consistent.

**4-** Team meetings are not only regular, they are regarded by
attending organizational representatives as an important to the
fulfillment their agency's TIM program responsibilities.

***4.1.2.3 Conduct training through simulation or "in-field"
exercises?***

**0-** There is no training done relative to traffic incident management
practices.

**1-** Training is done on various techniques and procedures for
handling traffic incidents, but that training is internal within an
agency.

**2-** Some initial efforts have been made to do "cross-training" with
other agencies specific to managing traffic incidents. This training is
not regularly scheduled, however, and many agency "new hires" may never
be exposed to it.

**3-** The TIM team actively plans for and looks for opportunities to
engage multiple agencies in traffic incident management training with
field and "table top exercises and simulations.

**4-** Coordinated multi-agency training on the handling of traffic
incidents is a planned and supported part of the TIM program. Not only
to response teams train together, but agencies engage representatives of
partner agencies in their internal training efforts on TIM.

***4.1.2.4 Conduct post-incident debriefings?***

**0-** No

**1-** Individual agencies, particularly fire and rescue, conduct
internal debriefings for their agencies.

**2-** The need for multi-agency debriefings has been discussed but none
have been held.

**3-** Some multi-agency debriefings have been held following major
incidents particularly those that have attracted media attention. There
is no established regular process.

**4-** There is an established process for regularly holding
multi-agency post-incident debriefings. The findings of these
debriefings are fed back into TIM program planning.

***4.1.2.5 Conduct planning for "special events" -- (a) construction and
maintenance; (b) sporting events/concerts/conventions/etc.; (c)
weather-related events; (d) catastrophic events?***

**0-** Planning for special events is the responsibility of the event
promoter. Agencies are contacted as needed.

**1-** Some minimal coordination and planning is done for larger-scale
annual events, but this planning is not well-coordinated among affected
agencies and organizations.

**2-** Coordinated planning of major recurring events is done among a
core group of organizations. It was (or may have been) the catalyst for
forming the TIM team.

**3-** The TIM team actively coordinates planning for major and minor
special events as a matter of course. Event promoters are generally well
acquainted with the planning and organizing process and the needs and
requirements of the various agencies.

**4-** Special event planning and coordination is an integral part of a
formal TIM program. The process is well understood and works smoothly.

**Part 4.1.3 -- Performance Measurement**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.1.3.1 Have multi-agency agreements on what measures will be tracked
and used to measure program performance?***

**0-** Performance relative to traffic incident management is not
measured by anyone.

**1-** Individual agencies measure their response time to traffic
incidents, but there is no activity contemplated to measure program
performance of multiple agencies working together.

**2-** Electronic records of incidents exist both in traffic management
databases and in CAD databases. However, they don't use comparable
measures for the same incident and definitions don't match well.
Interest has been expressed in compiling a larger view of incidents from
records in these disparate databases, but this has been nearly
impossible to do.

**3-** Efforts are underway to identify specific measures in various
databases that can be tracked or aligned to enable a more comprehensive
evaluation of multi-agency program activities.

**4-** The formal TIM program has defined specific measures program
performance agreed to by partner agencies (as opposed to agency specific
performance) that are tracked and evaluated to measure the programs
success as well as areas needing improvement.

***4.1.3.2 Have agreed upon methods to collect and analyze/track
performance measures?***

**0-** Performance relative to traffic incident management is not
measured by anyone.

**1-** While individual agencies measure performance criteria important
to them there is no effort or interest evident in coordinated
multi-agency program performance measurement. Program goals, if they
exist, are agency specific and therefore any performance measurement is
also agency specific.

**2-** Interest has been expressed in program performance measurement
but inconsistent data definitions have made is an impossible task to do
electronically. Individual agencies are reluctant to change or modify
their performance measures or their electronic data definitions.

**3-** Agreement has been reached on what should be measured, how it
should be measured and by whom (resources identified to support the
program performance measurement). Doing it is still problematical, but
efforts are underway to identify ways to better align definitions of
incident events so that electronic information from disparate databases
can be fused to enable good performance measurement.

**4-** The formal TIM program has defined specific measures program
performance, as opposed to agency specific performance, that are tracked
and evaluated to measure the programs success as well as areas needing
improvement. Performance measurement is a supported program activity.

***4.1.3.3 Have established targets for performance in: a) response and
b) clearance?***

**0-** There are no target goals for response or clearance.

**1-** Individual agencies, primarily public safety agencies have
established response time criteria. Clearance goals are regarded as
unimportant, controversial or threatening, or as implications that
clearance takes precedence over responder safety. There are no clearance
goals.

**2-** There are no formal TIM program goals, but individual agencies
understand the importance of setting them. They have been discussed but
not adopted.

**3-** Broad goals have been set but they are still somewhat
controversial as is their measurement.

**4-** Under the formal TIM program, specific multi-agency program goals
for incident response and clearance have been set and agreement has been
reached regarding the criteria used to evaluate the achievement of the
goals. Goal establishment and measurement is no longer controversial.

***4.1.3.4 Conduct periodic review of whether or not progress is being
made to achieve targets?***

**0-** Since there are no target goals, there is no review of
performance.

**1-** Individual agencies measure and review their own target goals but
this review is internal.

**2-** There are no formal TIM program goals, but individual agencies
are measuring and evaluating response and clearance times where they
regard them as important to their agency's mission.

**3-** Broad program goals for response and clearance have been set but
since they are still somewhat controversial, their measurement and
evaluation is not consistent or done on a regular basis.

**4-** Under the formal TIM program, specific multi-agency program goals
for incident response and clearance have been set and agreement has been
reached regarding their assessment. Periodic evaluations of incident
response and clearance times are program-based and are not viewed as
threatening to individual agencies. The frequency of incidents that fall
outside the goals for clearance are tracked and evaluation is done
within the TIM program structure to identify possible problem areas. The
establishment of goals has focused attention on the need to clear
incident as quickly and safely as possible.

**[Section 2 -- Operational Issues]{.underline}**

**Part 4.2.1 -- Procedures for Major Incidents**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.2.1.1 Have established criteria for what is a "major incident" --
incident levels or codes?***

**0-** No, this has never been discussed or it is thought not to be
needed.

**1-** Lack of clarity on the magnitude of the incident is a problem
that has been discussed but no action has been taken to resolve it.

**2-** Efforts are underway to develop an incident classification system
that will easily convey to all response agencies the general magnitude
of the incident that in turn might generally define its expected
duration.

**3-** An incident classification system is in "initial" use and testing
and is being refined to reflect field experience and the understanding
of the responding agencies.

**4-** An incident classification system is used, well understood and
has proven very helpful in the initial phases of the incident to convey
general incident magnitude information to responding agencies.

***4.2.1.2 Identify high ranking agency members available on 24/7 basis
to respond to a major incident (Major Incident Response Team)?***

**0-** No. Response of lead agency persons depends on when and where the
incident occurs and who's on duty.

**1-** The need for such a team has been discussed, but no significant
action has been taken.

**2-** Discussions are underway with key transportation and public
safety agencies to develop a team or teams of supervisory-level persons
to respond to major incidents on a "24/7" basis.

**3-** A team (or teams) have been formed an initial results are good.
The team members know and understand each other and work well together.
There are still some problems with consistency of response on a 24/7
basis.

**4-** Major Incident Response Teams are an integral and highly
successful part of the TIM program. Response of the team members on a
24/7 basis is excellent and consistent and the teams work effectively to
direct the quick and safe clearance of major incidents.

***4.2.1.3 Have a pre-identified (approved) contact list of resources
(including special equipment) for incident clearance and hazardous
materials response?***

**0-** No.

**1-** Some agencies have lists of resources, but there is no master
list and the information is not shared among agencies

**2-** Discussions are underway with key transportation and public
safety agencies to develop a list of resources but there is no master
list yet available.

**3-** A list of resources and contacts is available, but there are some
"holes" in the list and some specialized equipment is hard to obtain on
short notice. The list works but there are kinks to be ironed out.

**4-** A comprehensive list of resources available from multiple sources
exists and is used successfully. There are very few problems in getting
whatever is needed when it is needed. Interagency cooperation on
locating and obtaining needed resources is exceptional.

***4.2.1.4 Have the response equipment pre-staged for timely
response?***

**0-** No.

**1-** Individual agencies have discussed pre-staging of resources to
better meet their own needs but no action or coordinated discussion has
taken place.

**2-** Some equipment (e.g. traffic control) is pre-staged but its
availability and functions are not widely understood or appreciated.

**3-** There is an equipment pre-staging plan, especially for traffic
control equipment and it use has been reasonably successful. There are
still some problems in identifying what exactly is available, where it
is and how to access it and bring it to the scene. These problems are
been worked out.

**4-** Pre-staged equipment, especially for traffic control, is
available and information about its location, accessibility, and
transport is widely available and widely understood by all partners.
Procedures for getting it to the scene are also understood and work
smoothly. Equipment needed is available when it is needed.

**Part 4.2.2 -- Responder and Motorist Safety**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.2.2.1 Train all responders in traffic control procedures?***

**0-** No. Traffic control, if done at all, is provided by whomever is
available and they are not trained in god traffic control techniques.

**1-** Transportation responders have some traffic control training, but
their availability is problematical. Law enforcement also has some
training, but traffic control is not consistent with the incident.

**2-** Efforts are underway to develop training for all on-scene
responders and to identify appropriate traffic control measures for
various types of incidents.

**3-** Training is available in traffic control, but not all response
agencies take advantage of it.

**4-** Training in traffic control is an essential piece of the TIM
program. Agencies cooperatively have agreed to traffic control standards
appropriate for specific agency types. Only persons who have been
trained and certified in traffic control are authorized to perform the
function at intermediate and major incident scenes.

***4.2.2.2 Utilize on-scene traffic control procedures for various
levels of incidents in compliance with MUTCD?***

**0-** No. Traffic control is done mostly by law enforcement and they
don't understand the MUTCD.

**1-** Transportation agencies understand the requirements of the MUTCD
but few others do.

**2-** Discussions are underway about the MUTCD requirements and how all
responders at traffic incidents should apply them. There is, however, no
mechanism to train responders in traffic control so provision of good
traffic control is inconsistent.

**3-** Training is available in traffic control for agencies, and
traffic control has improved, but the requirements are not fully
understood by all response agencies and the application of traffic
control is still inconsistent.

**4-** Traffic control standards and practices for all ranges of
incidents that are in full compliance with the MUTCD have been adopted
and are used at all incidents. All persons providing traffic control are
fully trained in these standards and practices.

***4.2.2.3 Utilize traffic control procedures for the end of the
incident traffic queue?***

**0-** No. Attention is directed to the incident site only.

**1-** We understand that this is a problem, but we don't have resources
to do anything about it.

**2-** Attempts to warn drivers are primarily through traffic
information regarding incidents, but even that doesn't often mention how
long the queue is.

**3-** Attempts are made, especially with major incidents, to provide
warning to drivers approaching the end of the traffic queue.

**4-** Traffic queues are actively monitored as a part of incident
traffic control and good advance warning is provided regarding the end
of the traffic queue. The warning is adjusted as the queue grows or
shrinks.

***4.2.2.4 Have mutually understood equipment staging and emergency
lighting procedures on-site to maximize traffic flow past an incident
while providing responder safety?***

**0-** No. These issues are handled by the individual agencies.

**1-** Some minor changes are being made by individual agencies but
there is no coordinated action or discussion of these issues.

**2-** There are ongoing discussions about emergency lighting policies
and procedures related to traffic control and responder safety, but no
significant policy changes have been implemented yet

**3-** Emergency lighting policies have been mutually adopted in the TIM
program, but there is still some confusion and disagreement about their
implementation

**4-** Emergency lighting policies have been mutually adopted in the TIM
program. Agencies are trained in the policies and procedures and they
are, for the most part, faithfully implemented on-scene.

**Part 4.2.3 -- Response and Clearance Policies and Procedures**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.2.3.1 Utilize the Incident Command System?***

**0-** There is little or no understanding of ICS other than with fire
and rescue agencies. "who's in charge" is an issue that occasionally
arises and causes confusion and unclear direction at incident scenes

**1-** The issue of incident command has been discussed among public
safety agencies, but its application at incident scenes, especially
complex ones, is not fixed or accepted by all responders

**2-** The application of ICS is well understood by public safety
responders even if there are some disagreements about its deployment.
Breakdowns in command structure are rare. Unified Command is not
understood in the same way by various agencies and is never used at
highway incidents anyway.

**3-** ICS is well understood by all public safety agencies and also
understood by transportation and private sector responders. Criteria and
procedures for establishing Unified Command have been discussed among
all agencies. Unified Command is frequently employed at large incidents
involving multiple response agencies, but agencies still seem to have
different understandings of the incident chain of command and how it
changes during an incident.

**4-** The application of ICS is well understood by all responders.
Unified Command is used at all major incidents with multiple responding
agencies as a matter of policy. Major incidents run smoothly, at least
from an incident command standpoint. Communication of information up and
down the command chain works well.

***4.2.3.2 Have specific policies and procedures for fatal accident
investigation that also address maintenance of traffic flow?***

**0-** No. The investigation and preservation of evidence takes primacy
and there is no consideration of traffic flow other than to secure the
crash site.

**1-** Law enforcement attempts to maintain traffic flow if possible,
but this is of low priority. There is little or no coordination with
other responding agencies.

**2-** Discussions are underway among some of the responding agencies on
how to more effectively accommodate traffic while investigating the
crash.

**3-** Law enforcement agencies have examined their crash investigation
procedures and priorities in coordination with other agencies and
accommodation of traffic now has a much higher priority during the crash
investigation process.

**4-** The safety and mobility impacts of lane and road closures is
fully appreciated by responding partners. Accommodation of traffic has
high priority and efforts are routinely undertaken to maximize traffic
flow past or around the crash site while not jeopardizing the crash
investigation.

***4.2.3.3 Have specific policies and procedures for hazardous materials
response that also address the maintenance of traffic flow?***

**0-** No. The handling of hazmat and the safety of the responders takes
primacy and there is no consideration of traffic flow other than to
secure the crash site.

**1-** Traffic flow is maintained if possible, but this is of low
priority. There is little or no coordination with other responding
agencies. Clean up of engine fluids (diesel fuel from saddle tanks,
gasoline, crankcase oil, anti-freeze, etc.) is treated as a hazmat
response.

**2-** Discussions are underway among some of the responding agencies on
how to safely speed hazmat clean up and also more effectively
accommodate traffic during the incident. Discussions about handling of
engine fluid spills are underway to allow faster handling and cleanup.

**3-** Hazardous materials contracts have been reviewed or renegotiated
in order to provide more rapid response to hazmat incidents and more
effective clean up. Accommodation of traffic now has a much higher
priority. An engine fluids clean policy is in development or has
recently been adopted.

**4-** The response to hazardous materials incidents is swift and
efficient and the clean up is handled expeditiously while providing
on-site safety to responders, travelers and nearby residents and
businesses. Accommodation of traffic is given high priority. Clean up of
spilled engine fluids is done routinely, quickly and without incident.

***4.2.3.4 Have quick clearance policies for major and minor
incidents?***

**0-** No. These issues are handled by the individual agencies.

**1-** A "Move It" law has been discussed. The DOT has shown some
interest in more aggressive clearance of spilled non-hazardous loads. No
actions have been taken.

**2-** A "Move It" law is being drafted. Discussions are underway about
how to effectively clear spilled loads and heavily damaged vehicles.
Liability is a significant issue.

**3-** "Move It" is now law, but it is not widely understood by
motorists. There is agreement among transportation, law enforcement and
towing and recovery specialists on policies and procedures for quickly
clearing heavily damaged vehicles and spilled non-hazardous cargoes.
There are some implementation problems, however, and while most smaller
incidents are cleared quickly, larger incidents still present problems.

**4-** Minor incidents are cleared quickly. Motorists understand and
obey the "move It" law. Major incidents involving heavily damaged
vehicles including trucks and their spilled non-hazardous cargoes are
cleared quickly. Relationships with towers and recovery specialists is
very good.

***4.2.3.5 Have a pre-qualified list of available and contracted towing
and recovery operators (to include operators' capabilities)?***

**0-** No. Sometimes it's a "free-for-all".

**1-** Law enforcement has a rotation list, but qualifications for being
on the list are not very strict and there is not differentiation on the
list between small, medium or heavy duty towing and heavy recovery.

**2-** The rotation list is differentiated into towing and recovery
classes and minimum qualifications exist for being on the list in each
class.

**3-** Towing arrangements are being enhanced to include more specific
requirements or contract provisions that include levels of training,
certification and equipment.

**4-** Acquisition of towing and recovery services is achieved through
in-place rotational or towing contracts that assure these services are
provided by towing and recovery specialists trained and certified for
the type of service needed and using the correct equipment.

***4.2.3.6 Use motorist assist service patrols?***

**0-** No.

**1-** Some limited private sector services are available.

**2-** Limited services are provided primary on long holiday weekends.

**3-** Operational service patrol exists, not yet 24/7, but for greater
than 8 hours per day (weekdays)

**4-** Full service patrol (24/7) operates within a TIM program with
full communications with appropriate transportation and public safety
agencies.

**[Communication and Technology Issues]{.underline}**

**Part 4.3.1 -- Integrated Interagency Communications**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.3.1.1. Have a two-way interagency voice communications system
allowing for direct on-site communications between incident
responders?***

**0-** Voice communication other than face-to-face is difficult due to
incompatible radio frequencies.

**1-** Voice communication with other agencies is difficult but cell
phones help.

**2-** Activity is underway to establish emergency frequencies available
to all agencies, but the radio systems make full participation of all
agencies difficult.

**3-** Activity is underway to integrate emergency communication by all
agencies through trunked radio systems and/or enhanced cellular
telephone communications equipment and procedures.

**4-** Voice communications among responders of other agencies is
reliable and works well due to integration of radio systems, trunked
radio systems, cellular telephone communications, walkie-talkies, etc.
and a communications discipline is followed.

***4.3.1.2. Provide data and video information transfer between agencies
and applications (TMC-CAD integration)?***

**0-** There is no exchange of data or video information.

**1-** Some video is sent from the Transportation Management Center
(TMC) to law enforcement.

**2-** Some public safety agencies can exchange information among their
CAD systems but transportation agencies are not linked.

**3-** Efforts are underway to integrate CAD-TMC data systems, but
two-way data flow is not yet possible. Some CAD information can be sent
to CAD terminals in the TMC or directly to TMC databases, but no return
flow is possible.

**4-** Data and video information is exchanged among transportation and
public safety agencies according to mutually agreed to procedures,
exchanging information among agencies needed to manage and coordinate
incident response.

**Part 4.3.2 -- Transportation Management Systems**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.3.2.1 Use Traffic Management Center(s) to coordinate incident
notification and response?***

**0-** There is no TMC.

**1-** A TMC exists but it coordinates information only within
transportation

**2-** Public safety agencies are investigating the possible uses of TMC
facilities.

**3-** Some public safety personnel are co-located in the TMC to
coordinate their agency's response using TMC capabilities and
facilities.

**4-** The TMC serves as a focal point for the two-way flow of
information needed to coordinate incident response and status as well as
a source of incident information to the public. Public safety dispatch
for traffic incidents is done from the TMC using TMC facilities to
gather information.

***4.3.2.2 Have a developed technical infrastructure for surveillance
and rapid detection of traffic incidents?***

**0-** Incident detection is primarily through emergency cell phone
(911) calls. There is no surveillance system.

**1-** A TMC exists and uses an incident detection algorithm to detect
incidents on that portion of the system under surveillance.
Communications with law enforcement are minimal and informal. Detection
of minor incidents is nearly impossible.

**2-** DOT uses multiple sources (electronic surveillance and service
patrols) and this information is exchanged with law enforcement (or
public safety dispatch). On major incidents law enforcement (or public
safety dispatch) provides a "heads up" call to DOT. Minor incidents are
detected largely by patrols if at all.

**3-** Surveillance system exists and nearly all of the freeway mileage
and information is exchanged regularly (primary through voice) between
transportation and law enforcement (or public safety dispatch).

**4-** Nearly all freeway mileage and a significant portion of the
arterial street mileage is under some form of electronic surveillance.
Automated and voice information about incidents and their effects are
regularly exchanged. Private sector traveler information and media
sources are also incorporated.

***4.3.2.3 Have specific policies and procedures for traffic management
during incident response (i.e. signal timing changes, opening/closing of
HOV lanes/ramp metering)?***

**0-** No, this isn't done.

**1-** Transportation agencies can change signal timing to respond to
incidents, but little else is done to manage traffic.

**2-** Exploring ways of merging (fusing) data from different sources
for incident status and tracking and for performance measurement

**3-** Some limited ability exists to merge information. Wider scale
data merging is in development.

**4-** Data is merged (fused) from different sources for incident status
and tracking and for performance measurement.

**Part 4.3.3 -- Traveler Information**

Does your traffic incident management program...

***4.3.3.1 Have the ability to merge/integrate and interpret information
from multiple sources?***

**0-** No.

**1-** This ability exists only within each agency

**2-** Exploring ways of merging (fusing) data from different sources
for incident status and tracking and for performance measurement

**3-** Some limited ability exists to merge information. Wider scale
data merging is in development.

**4-** Data is merged (fused) from different sources for incident status
and tracking and for performance measurement.

***4.3.3.2 Have a real-time motorist information system providing
incident-specific information?***

**0-** No.

**1-** DOT and others are interested, but infrastructure doesn't exist
to explore this in more detail.

**2-** Discussions are underway (also in context of ITS Regional
Architecture) to see how this might be done with existing and planned
infrastructure and as part of a 511 Traveler Information system.

**3-** In development, but not yet available. Private sector media
sometimes provides fairly specific information about the magnitude and
extent of an incident.

**4-** Real-time motorist information system is available. Incident
specific information is offered through public and private sources and
on the 511 Traveler Information system.

***4.3.3.3 Provide motorists with travel time estimates for route
segments?***

**0-** No.

**1-** DOT and others are interested, but infrastructure doesn't exist
to explore this in more detail.

**2-** Discussions are underway (also in context of ITS Regional
Architecture) to see how this might be done with existing and planned
infrastructure.

**3-** In development, but not yet available. Private sector media
sometimes attempt to make estimates.

**4-** Travel time estimates are provided by highway signs and by
private traveler information services.