# Presentation: 714149

## Road Weather Management Program The FHWA Program for ITS Requirements, Development and Operations Research  

**Road Weather Management Program**** ****The FHWA Program for ITS Requirements, Development and Operations Research  **

**Paul Pisano**
**FHWA/HOTO**
**paul.pisano@fhwa.dot.gov**
**202 366 1301**

**To The National Hurricane Conference**
**April 9/10, 2001**

**Gary G. Nelson**
**Mitretek Systems Inc.**
**gnelson@mitretek.org**
**202 488 5718**

## Outline

**Overview of the FHWA Road Weather Management Program.**
**Decision Support Development**
**Overview of the Maintenance Decision Support System (MDSS) project and the National Labs**
**How this relates to Emergency Management**

## Federal Road Weather Programs

**Federal Road Weather Programs**

**Federal Highway Administration**
**FHWA**

**Operations Core Business Unit**
**Christine Johnson**
**HOP**

**Office of Transportation Operations**
**Shelley Row**
**HOTO**

**Paul Pisano**
**HOTO**

**Highway Research**
**Gary Larsen**
**HRD**

**Rudy Persaud**
**HRDO**

**ITS Joint Program Office**
**Jeff Paniatti**
**ITS-JPO**

_**Committees**_
**Weather Information for Surface Transportation (JAG-WIST)**
**Integrated Observing Systems (CIOS)**

**National Weather Service**
**NWS**

**Public and Fire Weather**
**Jim Lee**

**American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials**
**AASHTO**

**Office of the Federal Coordinator for Meteorology**
**Sam Williamson**
**OFCM**

**FHWA**

**Road Weather Program**

** ****Other USDOT Agencies**
**FAA, FTA, FRA, RSPA, USCG**

**FEMA**

**George Schoene**
**Al Benet**
**HOTO**

**Emergency**
**Management**
**Program**

## Road Weather Management Program Goals

**1.  Develop improved weather information systems that meet the demands of all users and operators;**
**2. Develop improved maintenance technologies for winter mobility, and;**
**3.  Develop traffic operations/incident management procedures under all weather events.**

## Decision Support 

## Decision

**Support**

**Transportation**
**Impact**

**Weather**

**Operational**
**Technique**
**Decision**

- Information

***Surface Transportation Weather Decision Support Requirements (STWDSR) Project***

## MDSS

**FHWA Weather Team White Paper**
**1997-98**

**STWDSR V1.0 Needs**
**1999**

**Stakeholder Meetings**
**Feb, May 2000**

**STWDSR V2.0 Operational Concept Definition (OCD)**
**July, 2000**

**STWDSR V2.0 Preliminary Interfaces Requirements (PIR)**
**October, 2000**

_**STWDSR V3.0/V4.0**_
**TM/EM/Traveler Needs**
**Impacts/Benefits**
**Operational Test Requirements**
**Mar., Sept., 2001**

## References

**   ****Electronic Documents Library**

**www.its.dot.gov/welcome.htm**

**  ****White Paper**
**  ****STWDSR V1.0**
**  ****STWDSR V2.0: OCD**
**  ****STWDSR V2.0 PIR**
**  ****STWDSR V2.0 Executive Summary**

## The MDSS Prototype and Test 

## Maintenance Decision Support System (MDSS) Project

** ****One realization of the STWDSR Operational Concept Definition (OCD) for winter road managers**
** ****Set of functions implemented**
** ****Set of needs served**
** ****Continues STWDSR stakeholder alliance**
** ****National Labs will develop *****non-exclusive***** components**
** ****State DOTs will *****operate***
** ****Vendors will *****provide and integrate***** into Road Weather Information System (RWIS)**

## Slide 11

## MDSS:  Benchmarks

** ****Prototype Phase**
** ****First Prototype Review **
** ****Operational test pre-bid meeting (CRREL, 21-22 June)**
** ****Prototype demonstration (September)**
** ****Operational Test Phase**
** ****Notice of Intent (April)**
** ****RFP (May)**
** ****Award (September)**
** ****Initial Operating Capability (August, 2002)**
** ****Test and evaluation (winter 02-03)**

## The Program and Emergency Management

## Our information systems should survive the most severe threats.

***Our ***_***information***_*** ***_***systems***_*** should survive the most severe threats.***

***There has to be an operational continuum from the mundane to the severe.***

***Our ***_***physical***_*** ***_***infrastructure***_*** may not survive the most severe threats.***

## Decision Scales

**Decision Scales**

**Scales**

**Space-time Domain**

**Decisions**

**Climatic**
**(Planning)**

**Synoptic/Meso**
**(Operational)**

**Micro**
**(Warning)**

**Organization, Facilities,**
**Procedures, **
**Consumables**

**Monitoring, Mobilization,**
**Landfall-Evacuation,**
** **
**Route/Traffic Mgt.,**
**Incident Response**
**Search and Rescue**

**Flash-Flood Evacuation,**
**Facility Failure Warning**

**Inter-State**
**months-years**

**States/Districts**
**hours-days**

**Districts/Watersheds**
**sub-hours**

**Watershed/**
**Structure-**
**Focused**

**Landfall-**
**Focused**

**Contingency**
**Planning**

**Notes:**
This figure lists types of decisions along a scale dimension.  The top is larger scale (climatic/planning) and the bottom is the finest (micro/warning) scale associated with direct observation and response.  Each scale needs to be examined for appropriate coordination, information system design, and response technique.  Generally, going down the scales goes from advanced planning at the federal/multi-state level, to very local warning and response capabilities.  A key issue is how to coordinate across the scales as well as across jurisdictions and agencies.  That is, larger scales can prime finer scaled preparedness and response according to advanced assessment of the threat.  In some cases, aggregating the finer scaled observations and responses will alter the large scale response.  There are “vertical” as well as “horizontal” information exchanges that must be considered.

The scale of weather prediction must match the management decision scale.  The longer the time lead for the decision, the more uncertain are the weather and traffic predictions. An important issue is the gap between the NHC “warning” issuance and the longest time lead decisions for evacuation. Better probabilistic assessment of threats and explicit risk-decision making is needed, aided by decision support systems.  This includes traffic network modeling that covers multiple scales (regional/macro and sub-regional/micro).  Modeling techniques have been developed for ITS evaluation that consider varying travel conditions to identify the most robust TM strategies. Dynamic traffic simulation models and better road-condition/traffic observation can support adaptive traffic management decisions in the face of  incidents and infrastructure damage.  

## In the 10 deadliest storms, there were 

**In the 10 deadliest storms, there were **
**264 fatalities (78%) from inland flooding****.  **
**Most of these were associated with **
**drowning and vehicles.****  **

**Storm**
**Surge**

**Tornado**

**High**
**Surf**

**Winds**

**Inland**
**Flooding**

**Notes:**
Effective coastal evacuation is needed to protect life from storm surge, high surf and strong coastal winds.  But the data show that the greatest loss of life is from inland flooding, that must be predicted and managed at a finer scale than the landfall phase of the storm..

Between 1970 and 1999, 600 hurricane-related fatalities occurred in the United States and its coastal waters.  The table above shows the distribution of 264 fatalities from the 10 deadliest storms in this period.  For the 600 total:

 While one-quarter of these deaths occurred in coastal areas, only six deaths were attributed to storm surge. 
 More than 50 percent of fatalities resulted from inland (i.e., freshwater) flooding.  
 Over 80 percent of deaths were caused by drowning, with nearly 60 percent of deaths caused by freshwater drowning. 
 During Hurricane Floyd, inland floods claimed 50 lives in the United States.
 Nearly 60 percent of Floyd-related deaths were associated with drowning and vehicles.

## Infrastructure Damage

- Means disruption of evacuations
- and emergency response.

**Notes:**
Some illustrations of infrastructure damage associated with Floyd.  These illustrate the very localized nature of the inland flooding and damage threat.  Note also the dam failure that was a critical factor in the local watershed.

In general, the pre-landfall evacuation phase will occur with intact infrastructure.  However, the large traffic volumes in that phase require traffic operations practices, such as reversed lanes, access control at intersections, traffic control adjustment and traveler information (both pre-trip and en route).  Essential to this management is communications and surveillance--of traffic, the road conditions and weather.   Management of incidents on the highways, whether or not caused by weather, is critical during regional or local evacuations to preserve traffic throughput.  That applies to quick repair of minor infrastructure damage as well.  Highway transit and maintenance crews are important assets in emergencies and must be managed as part of overall emergency response.  

## Evacuation: Floyd Results 

**3 million (est.) people were evacuated from Florida, Georgia, North and South Carolina, resulting in record congestion problems.**
**Techniques included:**
**Mobilizing and prepositioning personnel and equipment,**
**Opening evacuation shelters,**
**Executing staged evacuations,**
**Reversing traffic flow during evacuation,**
**Altering traffic flow to enable at least one counter-flow lane,**
**Opening shoulder lanes to traffic and closing roadways, **
**Disseminating information to evacuees (e.g., residents, tourists),**
**Communicating with neighboring state agencies.**

**Notes:**
Additional notes on Hurricane Floyd. 

Florida DOT & Florida Highway Patrol 
While all vulnerable residents were safely evacuated from coastal areas, excessive evacuation rates placed an enormous strain on the capacity of evacuation routes.  More than two million residents evacuated although only 1.3 million were at risk.  This was largely due to inadequate dissemination of information.

 Georgia DOT & Georgia State Patrol
In preparation for lane reversal operations on I-16 from Savannah to I-95, Georgia DOT mobilized staff, transporting equipment and diverted eastbound traffic onto a state route, GA 297.  Georgia State Patrol (GSP) deployed pilot cars to close eastbound lanes. The late decision to reverse traffic flow caused heavy congestion.  Travel time from Savannah to I-95, which averages 30 minutes, reached three hours.   During lane reversal operations, GSP officers used the right shoulder lane for patrolling, emergency access, and clearing of accidents and disabled vehicles.

North Carolina DOT & North Carolina State Highway Patrol
To manage evacuation traffic in Wilmington and the Outer Banks area of Dare County, residents in inland areas are asked to evacuate before eastern areas.  Flooding caused the closure of several state routes including NC 24, NC 210 and NC 53.  Lane reversal operations for I-40 were considered but not executed.  As a result, I-40 was heavily congested.  The average vehicle speed was 20 mph, with a maximum safe speed of 30 mph.   During evacuation, the trip from Wilmington to I-95 took five hours.  Normal travel time is about two hours.
In addition to implementing a staged evacuation and closing roads, NCDOT furnished traveler information via a website displaying statewide road closure information.  During reentry, the web site received two million hits.  NCDOT also provided a telephone service to respond to inquiries from the traveling public.

South Carolina DOT & State Highway Emergency Patrol
Notice of voluntary evacuation was followed by mandatory evacuation orders.  The relatively short interval between announcements caused major traffic congestion on I-26 between Charleston and Columbia.  Although this trip normally takes between two and three hours, reported travel times were between 14 and 18 hours.  Delay caused by unmanned traffic signals contributed to the lengthy travel times.  To alleviate congestion, lane reversal operations were ultimately implemented late in the day. Traffic flowed more smoothly during reentry operations.  Westbound lanes were reversed and opened to eastbound vehicles, DMS were deployed to notify travelers of ramp closures, and HARs were used to advise motorists of alternate routes.  During evacuation, the maximum per lane volume was roughly 1,400 vehicles per hour.   During reentry, maximum volume exceeded 2,000 vehicles per hour.

## Traveler Information

**Traveler Information**

** ****Mobile Obs**
**and**
**Vehicle**
**Control**

**Inter-Vehicle**
**Communication**
**or**
**“****Smart Cruise Control”**

** ****Mobile Obs**
**and**
**Vehicle**
**Control**

**Transponders**

**Dynamic Message **
**Signs**

**Operational Scale**
**Environmental Information**
**and Management**

**Other (wireless)**

**Roadside**
**Sensors**

**Information Service Providers**
**Specialized Traveler/Hazard Info.**

## Road Conditions and Network Modeling

**Trip Generation/**
**Distribution**

**Road Conditions and Network Modeling**

**Assignment**

**Trip Generation/**
**Distribution**

**Assignment**

**Static Modeling**

**Dynamic**
**Modeling**

**Road Condition Scales**

**Synoptic**
**(12 hrs)**

**Micro**
**<minutes**

**Direct**
**Obs.**

**Mode Split**

**Intra-Model**
**Feedbacks**

**Major**
**Threat**
**(high risk)**

**Re-route?**

**Throughput**
**Effects**

**Quasi-Static**
**Constraints**

**Mode Split**

**Tight**
**Behavioral**
**Coupling**

**Typical**
**ISP**

**Special**
**Road**
**Report**

_**Updates or**_
_**Contingencies**_

**Planning/**
**Climatic**
**Scale**

**Normal?**
**Conditions**
**or**
**Contingencies**

## ITS and Emergency Management

** ****Better threat information**
** ****Better monitoring of road conditions**
** ****Decision support=information fusion**
**Support of risk decision making**
** ****Open systems for shared information and coordination**
**inter-agency**
**inter-jurisdiction**
**Survivable systems, adaptable techniques**
**Better information to travelers/evacuees**
**Time saved = lives saved**

## Technology Showcase