Management

forTrafficIncident

Intelligent Transportation Systems 

U.S. Department of Transportation

Deployment Benefits 

and

Lessons Learned

BENEFITS

San Antonio Reduces 

Response Times by 20 Percent . . . . . . . . . 1

Quicker Response, 

Fewer Secondary Incidents . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Service Patrols Promote Fuel 

Conservation and Public Safety......... 2

ITS Benefits All Responders . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

How Can You Save $8 Million Per Year? . . 3

COSTS

FDOT Budget Supports a Variety of 

Traffic Incident Management Programs . . . 2

Service Patrols Prove Cost Effective. . . . . 3

DEPLOYMENT

Trends in Detection and Verification . . . . . 3 

LESSONS LEARNED

Managing Traffic Incidents – 

Lessons from Experience . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Americans lose 3.7 billion hours and 2.3 billion gallons of fuel every year sitting 

in traffic.1 In 2004, trucks idling in traffic are estimated to have cost the trucking industry 

some 243 million hours, the equivalent of 17,000 work years, with a cost of $8 billion.2

To combat the country’s growing transportation congestion problem, the U.S. Department 

of Transportation launched the National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s 

Transportation Network. One element of this initiative is to reduce incident-related 

congestion by promoting operational and technological improvements that increase 

incident response capabilities.3

Traffic Incident Management

Traffic Incident Management (TIM) is a systematic, planned, and coordinated 

effort to detect, respond to, and remove traffic incidents and restore traffic 

capacity as safely and quickly as possible. TIM involves the application 

of institutional, mechanical, and technical resources, including Intelligent Transportation 

Systems (ITS), and offers a number of measurable benefits: 

Traffic incident management reduces fuel consumption by about 1.2 percent 

annually,4 saving 2,600-7,700 gallons per incident.5

Traffic incident management reduces incident duration by up to 65 percent6

and reduces secondary crashes by 30–50 percent.7

Service patrols’ benefit-cost ratios range from 2:1 to 36:1.8

ITS technologies for traffic incident detection, verification, response, and communication 

are recognized as valuable tools by transportation professionals and are being used 

throughout the country:

32 percent of freeway miles are monitored by video to detect incidents, 

and 45 percent are served by service patrols.9

Traffic incident management on arterial streets is growing: 5 percent of arterial 

streets have video monitoring for detection, and 10 percent have service patrols.10

BENEFITS

San Antonio Reduces Response Times by 20 Percent

As populations surge across the south and southwest, roads get busier and delays get 

longer. That’s why the Texas Department of Transportation, the City of San Antonio 

(police/fire/emergency medical services/traffic), and VIA, the region’s transit provider, 

teamed up to develop and implement the TransGuide “smart highway” system.

TransGuide is an Intelligent Transportation System that uses dynamic message signs, loop 

•

•

•

•

•

continued on page 4
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT



For these and other benefits, visit: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov

Benefits

Quicker Response, 

Fewer Secondary 

Incidents

Secondary crashes 

due to congestion 

caused by a previous 

crash are estimated 

to represent 20 

percent of all 

crashes.11

The benefits of reduced incident duration 

through incident management programs 

are clear and well documented.

• Studies prove that the likelihood of a 

secondary crash increases by 2.8 percent 

for each minute the primary accident 

continues to be a hazard.12

• Maryland’s Coordinated Highways 

Action Response Team (CHART) 

incident management program 

resulted in an estimated 377 fewer 

secondary crashes in 2002.13

• Indiana’s Hoosier Helper service 

patrol contributed to an estimated 

reduction in secondary crashes 

of 259 in 1995.14

costs

FDOT Budget Supports a Variety of Traffic

Incident Management Programs

All States and metropolitan areas are 

constrained by budget limitations, and 

the Florida Department of Transportation 

(FDOT) is no exception. But with a $36 

million capital investment (annualized 

at about $8.3 million), FDOT has funded 

several programs designed to maintain 

traffic flow and hasten incident response 

through its District IV SunGuide 

Transportation Management Center.15

Some highlights of these efforts include:

• The Road Ranger service patrol utilizes 

11 vehicles covering 84 centerline miles 

on I-95, I-595, and I-75 at an annual cost 

of about $2.5 million, including services 

and vehicle leases.16

• The Severe Incident Response Vehicle 

program is a pilot program providing 

an incident command station and support 

to FDOT and Road Rangers during such 

major incidents as tractor trailer rollovers, hazardous material incidents, and 

fatalities.17 The approximately $310,000 

annual operating cost includes contracted 

services and one leased vehicle.18

• Traffic incident management services cost 

approximately $400,000 for 2005 and are 

geared toward maintaining interagency 

relationships and promoting dialogue.19

• The purchase of 45 closed circuit TV 

(CCTV) cameras and 106 detectors 

including installation, associated 

structures, and deployment have 

cost $2.8 million to date.20 The next 

deployment phase, scheduled for 2006, 

will include approximately 55 CCTV 

cameras, 224 detectors, and 55 miles 

of in-ground fiber optic communications 

at an estimated cost of $15.5 million.21

• The estimated annual staffing cost 

for Southeast Florida’s 511 Traveler 

Information System is $175,000.22

• The $11 million capital cost for 

dynamic message signs (DMS) includes 

approximately 50 miles of in-ground 

fiber optic communications, 31 signs, 

structures, foundation, controllers, 

cabinets, and installation. $18,600 has 

been budgeted annually for electricity, 

and annual maintenance costs will be 

about $750,000 for spare parts, labor, 

and preventative maintenance. DMS 

maintenance is contracted out.23

Benefits

Service Patrols Promote Fuel Conservation and Public Safety

Service patrols are 

known to help decrease 

incident-related delay, 

which means faster 

travel and fewer 

vehicle-hours annually. 

But less congestion also 

means less fuel wasted as vehicles idle while 

waiting for traffic to clear. The following 

examples show how fuel consumption 

was reduced at regional and local levels 

by decreasing incident-related congestion 

through service patrols.

Maryland’s CHART Program

A 2000 study of Maryland’s Coordinated 

Highways Action Response Team (CHART) 

program showed how incident reduction 

benefits Marylanders: 

• Estimated fuel savings: 4.1 million 

gallons annually.24

• Estimated economic value of fuel 

savings: $6.1 million.25

Florida’s Road Ranger Program

The Florida Road Ranger service patrol 

provides the residents of Florida with a 

significant reduction in wasted fuel due

to congestion: 

• Estimated fuel savings: 1.7 million 

gallons statewide monthly.26

• Estimated economic value of fuel 

savings: $3.4 million statewide monthly.27

According to the Florida Department of 

Transportation, this program not only 

cuts down on harmful emissions, it has an 

overall benefit-cost ratio of nearly 26:1.28

Thoughts from the Public

Service patrols are highly visible and have 

a powerful impact on frightened motorists. 

The box to the right contains excerpts from 

“ I truly felt my life was in 

danger as cars and trucks 

whizzed by...I felt my life was 

saved today due to this service...” 

“He right off was thinking safety

for everyone... me and my 

family, the traffic, and himself...” 

“ This is the best service the

state provides. I was back on

the road within 30 minutes...”

letters of appreciation that travelers have 

written to the Tennessee Department of 

Transportation in praise of their program 

in Chattanooga.29

— Travelers in Chattanooga, TN
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT



For these and other sample costs, visit: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov

Benefits

How Can You Save $8 Million Per Year?

Benefits

ITS Benefits All Responders

Fire, rescue, and emergency medical 

services (EMS) have different priorities 

than transportation agencies when clearing 

an incident. Their first concern is the safety 

of the victims and motorists; getting traffic 

flowing again is secondary. 

Including these first responders in the planning and development of a traffic incident 

management program, and maintaining 

consistent communication, will help ensure 

effective management of the traffic incident 

scene and cultivate multiagency ties, with 

the traveling public reaping the benefits of 

increased efficiency — and safety.

This kind of information sharing occurred 

during the 1996 Olympic Games in Atlanta. 

The Atlanta Fire Department, as part of its 

joint response efforts with the Georgia

Department of Transportation, the State 

patrol, and the city police, realized the 

benefit of closed circuit TV cameras.30

“ Being able to view the scene

of a freeway incident using the 

surveillance cameras helped us to 

better decide the type and number 

of units to send to the incident.”

— Tony Davidson, Chief of Communications, 

Atlanta Fire Department 

It’s important to keep all players in mind 

when deploying ITS. Better information to 

fire, rescue, and EMS means that they can 

arrive at the scene with the right equipment 

and resolve the incident more quickly. 

Houston TranStar did it by co-locating 75 

personnel from the Texas Department of 

Transportation, Harris County, Houston 

Metro, and the City of Houston. Then they 

added a variety of traffic management tools,

including a freeway management system, 

a freeway and arterial street incident management program, Intelligent Transportation 

System programs, a service patrol, and 

several other programs to the mix.

This combination of traffic professionals 

and a variety of traffic management tools, 

all with the goal of improving traffic flow, 

has saved an estimated 572,095 vehiclehours annually. For Houston, a metropolis 

covering more than 600 square miles and 

home to the Port of Houston, through 

which more than 200 million tons of cargo 

pass every year,37 that translates into an 

estimated economic value of $8.4 million 

saved annually.38 Other summary data show 

additional benefits:

• In 1996, high-occupancy vehicle lane 

restrictions were lifted seven times due to 

incidents on the mainline that blocked all 

lanes. The Texas Transportation Institute 

estimated that, due to that action, 12,910 

vehicles were able to avoid delay and save 

13.5 to 27 minutes. Vehicle delay savings 

were estimated at between $42,500 and 

$85,100 for those seven incidents.39

• The service patrol, in place since 

1989, has a benefit-cost ratio exceeding 

23:1.40

Deployment

Trends in Detection 

and Verification

Since 1997, more than 40 percent of 

freeway miles utilized dedicated call 

numbers for travelers to report incidents 

via cell phones.41 In fact, detection times 

can occur in as little as 1 minute in 

most metropolitan areas due to the 

proliferation of cellular phones. But, as 

the graph below shows, the number of 

cell phone calls to a dedicated number 

has remained flat; the fastest growing 

incident detection and verification 

method from 1997 to 2005 has been 

closed circuit TV (CCTV), which was 

deployed on 43 percent of freeways in 

2005, a 35 percent increase since 1997.42

But no single method will detect everything, and transportation management 

professionals rely on several methods 

to detect and verify incidents, including 

CCTV cameras, cellular telephone calls, 

automated incident detection, and service 

patrols, among others.

• CCTV, deployed in some 73 

metropolitan areas as of 2004,43 is one 

of the most cost-effective and efficient 

methods for incident verification.44

• The number of freeway miles 

covered by service patrols, which have 

a benefit-cost ratio of up to 36:1,45 has 

grown by 21 percent since 1997.46 This 

incident detection method was utilized 

in 74 metropolitan areas in 2004 and 

now covers 41 percent of freeway miles 

and 10 percent of arterial miles.

• Freeway coverage by automated 

incident detection, currently used in 

31 metropolitan areas, has increased by 

19 percent since 1997 and was in use 

on some 16 percent of freeways in 

the United States in 2005.47

Propagation of Incident Detection

and Verification Methods48

60

50

40

30

20

10

1997

Percent of Freeway Miles Covered

Surveillance Cameras

Cell Phone Call to

Dedicated Number

On-call Service Patrols

Automated Incident Detection

1999 2000 2004 2004 2005

Service Patrols Prove Cost Effective31

Location Operating Costs 

(Millions Per Year) Hours of Operation Fleet Size BenefitCost Ratio

Los Angeles, CA32 $20.5 6:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Mon – Fri.

10:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m. Sat – Sun 150 trucks 8:1

Detroit, MI33 $2.5 6:00 a.m. to 11:00 p.m. plus 

special events

32 drivers

34 vehicles 15:1

Ft. Lauderdale, FL34 $2.5 24 hours/day, 7 days/week 11 vehicles 21:1

Tennessee statewide35 $5.6 variable hours, 7 days/week 85 operators 

69 trucks

not 

available

Denver, CO36 $1.5 6:30 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.

3:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m. Mon – Fri 2 trucks 23:1
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

FHWA-JPO-07-001 • January 2007 • EDL# 14288

San Antonio continued from page 1

detectors, video surveillance cameras, and a 

communication network to respond rapidly 

to accidents and emergencies. 

The system provided a number of 

dramatic incident response improvements 

in a very short time as demonstrated in 

a comparison of sample crash statistics 

from the 3 years prior to deployment with 

sample statistics collected during the first 

year post deployment.

• Incident response times were reduced 

by 20 percent.60

• Average delay savings reached up to 700 

vehicle-hours per incident.61

• Fuel consumption decreased by 

up to 2,600 gallons per incident.62

• All these numbers translate into annual 

savings of $1.65 million in 1995 dollars.63

Survey results also indicate improvements 

in driver confidence due to the improved 

quality of traveler information available. 

Surveys taken after implementation 

indicated that driver response to posted 

instructions improved from 33 percent 

just after implementation to 80 percent at 

the time of the report.64

Lessons Learned

Managing Traffic Incidents — Lessons from Experience

The following are 

lessons learned on 

how to plan, design, 

operate, and maintain 

traffic incident management programs.

Traffic Incident Management 

Program Development

• Develop a combined strategy and implementation plan for coordinated arterial 

signal control during incidents.49 In Minnesota, the During Incidents Vehicles 

Exit to Reduce Time system provides 

demand-responsive signal timing along 

the arterials to accommodate additional 

demand, and monitors the freeway 

and arterial system with detection 

and video surveillance.

• Cultivate relationships among transportation, law enforcement, fire, and rescue 

agencies when developing a coordinated, 

multiagency, traffic incident management 

program.50 At the TransGuide Operations 

Center in San Antonio, the staff and 

representatives from the Texas Department of Transportation, the San Antonio 

Police Department, VIA (the regional 

transit provider), the San Antonio 

Public Works Department, the Alamo 

Dome, the Bexar County Sheriff’s 

Department, emergency services, and 

towing service providers formed 

the Corridor Management Team. The 

members meet regularly but informally 

to discuss traffic operations.

• Consider co-locating multiple agencies in 

a transportation management center 

(TMC) to foster personal relationships 

among key staff.51 The Houston TranStar 

TMC houses 75 co-located personnel 

from the Texas Department of Transportation, Harris County, Houston Metro, 

and the City of Houston (see related 

article on page 3). The streamlined 

management structure at TranStar 

maximizes public benefit by coordinating 

emergency response, increasing 

mobility, managing congestion, and 

enhancing safety.

Incident Detection, Verification, 

and Response

• Provide a combination of detection 

methods to detect incidents effectively 

and rapidly.52 While cellular phone calls 

continue to be the most widely used 

means of early detection, no single 

method will catch everything. Transportation management professionals rely 

on several methods to detect and verify 

incidents, including closed circuit TV 

cameras, cellular telephone calls, vehicle 

probes, call boxes, automated incident 

detection, and service patrols. Using a 

mix of detection methods enables more 

accurate and timely response.

• Establish common incident location 

identifiers.53 An agreement was 

developed between the Washington 

State Department of Transportation and 

the Washington State Police on a method 

of describing locations among the parties 

involved. As a result, both agencies were 

better able to pinpoint incident locations 

and decrease response times. 

• Provide training to dispatchers to elicit 

useful information about the incident from 

motorists.54 Motorists calling in on cell 

phones often provide incorrect or inadequate information to dispatchers. 

It is important to train dispatchers to ask 

the right kinds of questions to obtain 

the most accurate information possible. 

The more accurate the information, the 

better traffic managers and emergency 

services are able to respond efficiently 

and effectively to an incident. 

• Provide joint training among incident 

response agencies to improve response 

times and site management.55 In San 

Antonio, at the TransGuide Center, staff 

participate in three variations of training 

activities: mock incidents, tabletop 

exercises, and classroom workshops.

Incident Clearance and Evaluation

• Consider a service patrol to reduce 

incident clearance times.56 In the State of 

Washington, Incident Response Team 

personnel clear about 80 percent of 

incidents in less than 10 minutes each. 

• Provide consistent, high-quality information about incidents to influence traveler behavior.57

 TransGuide’s survey of 

motorist reaction to the information in 

San Antonio demonstrated a high level 

of acceptance of the system (80 percent 

followed its instructions, and 71 percent 

believed they saved time).58

• Conduct post-incident debriefings.59 In 

Chattanooga, Tennessee, the Incident 

Commander coordinates debriefing 

sessions after major incidents and a lessons 

learned memorandum is produced and 

distributed to all participating agencies.

For these and other lessons, visit:

www.itslessons.its.dot.gov. 

There’s More Online! 

ITS Applications Overview:

www.itsoverview.its.dot.gov

FHWA Office of Operations Traffic Incident 

Management Program: www.ops.fhwa.dot.

gov/incidentmgmt/index.htm

National Traffic Incident Management

Coalition: www.timcoalition.org

TIM Community of Practice:

www.timexchange.org

The online version of this document 

contains a full list of sources:

www.its.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/14288.htm
Intelligent Transportation Systems 

Management

forTrafficIncident

Source Information

Page 1. Introduction

1. U.S. Department of Transportation, National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s 

 Transportation Network, Washington, DC: May 2006. Report: isddc.dot.gov/OLPFiles/OST/012988.pdf

2. National Traffic Incident Management Coalition Website, timcoalition.org/?siteid=41&pageid=591

3. U.S. Department of Transportation, National Strategy to Reduce Congestion on America’s 

 Transportation Network, Washington, DC: May 2006. Report: isddc.dot.gov/OLPFiles/OST/012988.pdf

Page 1. Traffic Incident Management

4. The summary fact “Traffic incident management reduces fuel consumption by about 1.2 percent annually”

 is based on one article from the ITS Benefits Database:

Document Referenced Simulated v. 

Measured Data Location Date of Study

Percent Decrease 

in Annual 

Fuel Consumption

Federal Highway Administration, Metropolitan 

Model Deployment Initiative – Seattle Final 

Evaluation Report, Washington, DC: May 2000. 

ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

06D560796A6416DC852569610051E2E2

Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/

repts_te/12883.pdf

Simulated San Antonio, TX 2000 1.2%

5. The summary fact “Traffic incident management saves 2,600-7,700 gallons per major incident” is based on 

 two articles from the ITS Benefits Database: 
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

Document Referenced Simulated v. 

Measured Data Location Date of Study

Decrease in 

Fuel Consumption 

per Incident

Henk, Russel H., et al., “Before-and-After 

Analysis of the San Antonio TransGuide System,” 

paper presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of 

the Transportation Research Board, Washington, 

DC, January 1997. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

6653718EFFE52A5C852569610051E27F

Simulated San Antonio, TX 1996 2,600 gallons

Jacobson, L., et al., Incident Management Using 

Total Stations, Seattle, WA: August 1992. 

ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

0D0D8496BCC0EF69852569E700716FB3

Simulated Washington 

statewide 1992 7,770 gallons

6. The summary fact “Traffic incident management reduces incident durations by up to 65 percent” is based 

 on five articles from the ITS Benefits Database:

Document Referenced 

Simulated 

v. Measured 

Data

Location Date of 

Study

Percent Decrease in 

Incident Duration

Perrin, J., et al., Advanced Transportation System 

Elemental Cost Benefit Assessment, Washington, 

DC: March 2004. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

66602453BDBB0064852570C80070FFE6

Measured Salt Lake City, UT 2004 12%-36%

Bertini, R., et al., Evaluation of Region 2 Incident 

Response Program Using Archived Data, Portland 

State University Report No. PSU-CE-TRG-01-01, 

Portland, OR: June 2001. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

0/62838FB271765BD385257217005A5872

Measured Oregon, I-5 and 

Hwy 18 2001 15% and 30%

University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration, Performance 

Evaluation of CHART – Coordinated Highways 

Action Response Team – Year 2000, College Park, 

MD: November 2003. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

9FBABB7833F303C3852571B8004D4EF5

Measured Maryland statewide 2003 28%
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT 

Document Referenced 

Simulated 

v. Measured 

Data

Location Date of 

Study

Percent Decrease in 

Incident Duration

Petrov. A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits 

of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” 

paper presented at the 9th World Congress 

on Intelligent Transport Systems, Chicago, IL, 

October 14-17, 2002. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

151060B2B05095D385256C6F006FF9D6

Measured Maryland statewide 1999 55%

Petrov. A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits 

of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” 

paper presented at the 9th World Congress 

on Intelligent Transport Systems, Chicago, IL, 

October 14-17, 2002. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

151060B2B05095D385256C6F006FF9D6

Measured Maryland statewide 2000 57%

Institute of Transportation Engineers, 1996 ITS 

Tour Report: Eastern North America & 1996 

ITS World Congress: Volume 1, Washington, 

DC: 1997, p. 4-5. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

26F64E34457928EC852569610051E2D7

Measured Toronto, ON 1997 65%

7. The summary fact “Traffic incident management reduces secondary crashes by 30-50 percent” is based 

 on two articles from the ITS Benefits Database:

Document Referenced

Simulated 

v. Measured 

Data

Location Date 

Conducted

Percent Decrease 

in Secondary 

Crashes

Henk, Russel H., et al., “Before-and-After Analysis 

of the San Antonio TransGuide System,” paper 

presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of the 

Transportation Research Board, Washington, 

DC, January 1997. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

6653718EFFE52A5C852569610051E27F

Simulated San Antonio, TX 1996 30%

Highway Industry Development Organization, 

Ministry of Construction, Intelligent Transportation 

Systems Handbook in Japan, Tokyo, Japan: 

October 1997. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

30D32D9BB1685CF3852569610051E26F

Measured Odawara, Japan 1997 50%
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

8. The summary fact “Motorist assistance patrols’ benefit-cost ratio ranges from 2:1 to 36:1” is based 

 on four articles from the ITS Benefits Database:

Document Referenced Simulated v. 

Measured Data Location Date of Study

Benefit-Cost 

Ratio

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Norfolk, VA 1995 2.1 to 2.5:1

Minnesota Department of Transportation, Highway 

Helper Summary Report – Twin Cities Metro Area, 

St. Paul, MN: July 1994. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/B285A1F88

3C7C2BE852569610051E263

Benefits: 

Simulated

Costs: Measured

Minneapolis, MN 1994 2.3:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Orange County, CA 1995 3:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Riverside County, 

CA 1995 3:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Charlotte, NC 1993 3:1 to 7:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Dallas, TX 1995 3.3:1 to 

36.2:1
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT 

Document Referenced Simulated v. 

Measured Data Location Date of Study

Benefit-Cost 

Ratio

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Oakland, CA 1991 3.5:1

Latoski, S., et al., “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of 

Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of 

Transportation Engineering, Volume 125, Number 5, 

September/October 1999. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/B32DDDE

9827B2177852569610051E25C

Benefits: 

Simulated

Costs: Measured

Indianapolis, IN 1995

4.7:1 for 

daytime 

operations

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Minneapolis, MN 1995 5:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Sacramento, CA 1995 5.5:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Houston, TX 1994 6.6:1 to 

23.3:1

Cuciti, P. and B. Janson, “Incident Management via 

Courtesy Patrol: Evaluation of a Pilot Project in 

Colorado,” paper presented at the 74th Annual Meeting 

of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 

January 1995. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/BE1E4488F

F0F3E5B852569610051E29F

Benefits: 

Simulated

Costs: Measured

Denver, CO 1995 10.5:1 to 

16.9:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Los Angeles, CA 1993 11:1
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

10

Document Referenced Simulated v. 

Measured Data Location Date of Study

Benefit-Cost 

Ratio

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Fresno, CA 1995 12.5:1

Latoski, S., et al., “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of 

Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” Journal of 

Transportation Engineering, Volume 125, Number 5, 

September/October 1999. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/B32DDDE

9827B2177852569610051E25C

Benefits: 

Simulated

Costs: Measured

Indianapolis, IN 1996

13.3:1 for 

24-hour 

operations

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Detroit, MI 1995 14:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Chicago, IL 1990 17:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown Denver, CO 1996 20:1 to 23:1

Fenno D., and M. Ogden, “Freeway Service Patrols: 

A State of the Practice,” paper presented at the 77th 

Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database 

Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

Unknown

New York City 

and Westchester 

County, NY

1995 23.5:1

9. Federal Highway Administration, “Incident Management,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Trendsgraph.asp?comp=IM

10. Federal Highway Administration, “Incident Management,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Trendsgraph.asp?comp=IM
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

11

Page 2: Quicker Response, Fewer Secondary Incidents

11. Federal Highway Administration Office of Operations Webpage, “Traffic Incident Management,” 

 www.ops.fhwa.dot.gov/aboutus/one_pagers/tim.htm

12. Karlaftis, M.G., S.P. Latoski, N.J. Richards, and K.C. Sinha, “ITS Impacts on Safety and Traffic Management: 

 An Investigation of Secondary Crashes,” ITS Journal, Vol. 7, No. 1, 1999, pp. 39-52. 

 Article: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/14296.htm

 Cited in Horsley, John, “Advancing an [sic] National Agenda for Traffic Incident Management.” 

 Article: timcoalition.org/sites/ntimc/docs/NTIMC%20article%20for%20R_B%20magazine2.mht

13. University of Maryland, College Park and Maryland State Highway Administration, Performance Evaluation 

 of CHART – Coordinated Highways Action Response Team – Year 2002, College Park, MD: November 2003. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/ID/

 9FBABB7833F303C3852571B8004D4EF5

 Report: www.chart.state.md.us/downloads/readingroom/CHART_II_Documents/

 Final_Evaluation_Report_03-04.doc

14. Latoski, S., et al., “Cost-Effectiveness Evaluation of Hoosier Helper Freeway Service Patrol,” 

 Journal of Transportation Engineering, Volume 125, Number 5, September/October 1999. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 B32DDDE9827B2177852569610051E25C

Page 2: FDOT Budget Supports a Variety of Traffic Incident Management Programs

15. Florida Department of Transportation, District IV: Broward County, FL, 2005 Annual Report 

 SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Ft. Lauderdale, FL: January 2006, p. 19. 

 ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/0C66A52D53BD8592852571420066DCB4

 Report: www.smartsunguide.com/PDF/Annual%20Report%2006_JAN_31%20FINAL.pdf

16. Ibid., p. 14 and p. 19.

17. Florida Department of Transportation, District IV: Broward County, FL, 2004 Annual Report SMART 

 SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Ft. Lauderdale, FL: January 2005, p. 15. 

 Report: www.smartsunguide.com/PDF/SMART%20TMC%20Annual%20Report.pdf

18. Florida Department of Transportation, District IV: Broward County, FL, 2005 Annual Report SMART 

 SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Ft. Lauderdale, FL: January 2006, p. 19.

 ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/0C66A52D53BD8592852571420066DCB4

 Report: www.smartsunguide.com/PDF/Annual%20Report%2006_JAN_31%20FINAL.pdf

19. Ibid.

20. Ibid. See also, Florida Department of Transportation, District IV: Broward County, FL, 2004 Annual 

 Report SMART SunGuide Transportation Management Center (TMC), Ft. Lauderdale, FL: January 2005, 

 pp. 17-18. Report: www.smartsunguide.com/PDF/SMART%20TMC%20Annual%20Report.pdf

21. Ibid.

22. Ibid. 

23. Ibid.

Page 2: Service Patrols Promote Fuel Conservation and Public Safety

24. Petrov. A., et al. “Evaluation of the Benefits of a Real-Time Incident Response System,” paper presented 

 at the 9th World Congress Conference on ITS, Chicago, IL, October 14-17, 2002. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 151060B2B05095D385256C6F006FF9D6
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

12

25. Estimated economic value for CHART based on average annual fuel costs for 2000 as reported in 

 U.S. Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, Short Term Energy Outlook – 

 January 2002, Washington, DC: 2002, p. 23. 

 Report: www.eia.doe.gov/pub/forecasting/steo/oldsteos/jan02.pdf

26. Florida Department of Transportation, Road Ranger Benefit-Cost Analysis, Tampa, FL: 2006. 

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 758CD9800CCDE9B38525725F0068BB0D

 Report: www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_TE/FDOT_BD544_14_rpt.pdf

27. Ibid.

28. Ibid.

29. Tennessee Department of Transportation, HELP Annual Operating Report, July 1, 2004 – June 30, 2005,

 Nashville, TN: October 2005. ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/91A6A7FCACF317668525714200638FB7

Page 3: ITS Benefits All Responders

30. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices, A Cross-Cutting Study,

 Washington, DC: April 2000. See also, ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entries: 

 (1) www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&032E7396049034CE8525718F0062E879, 

 (2) www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&457366209E8D9BEA8525718F00648AA1 and 

 (3) www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&A636DFCF4D1A89278525718F00661959

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, 

 cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org)

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

Page 3: Motorist Assistance Patrols Prove Cost Effective

31. Fenno, David W. and Michael A. Ogden, “Freeway Services Patrols: A State of the Practice,” 

 paper presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, Washington, DC, 

 January 1998. ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

32. Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority Webpage, “About FSP,” 

 www.mta.net/projects_programs/fsp/about_fsp.htm and www.mta.net/news_info/facts.htm

 ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/13AE8D48114F8EC885257218006876D3

 ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/

 66F24F4460E32E938525725F00501B12

33. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments, MDOT Freeway Courtesy Patrol in Southeast Michigan: 

 2004 Evaluation Report, Detroit, MI: May 2005. ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/F9BA0916D8410B368525723C004C6565

 Report: www.semcog.org/products/pdfs/2004FCPREPORT.pdf

34. Florida Department of Transportation, Road Ranger Benefit-Cost Analysis, Tampa, FL: 2006. 

 ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/2FA61263C877AE888525722900608B08

 Report: www.dot.state.fl.us/research-center/Completed_Proj/Summary_TE/FDOT_BD544_14_rpt.pdf

35. Tennessee Department of Transportation, HELP Annual Operating Report, July 1, 2004 – 

 June 30, 2005, Nashville, TN: October 2005. ITS Costs Database Entry: 

 www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/91A6A7FCACF317668525714200638FB7
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

13

36. Colorado Department of Transportation, CDOT Launches Courtesy Patrol on I-70 West, 

 Denver, CO: March 4, 2005. ITS Costs Database Entry: www.itscosts.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 0/A2E3E5BA7B6915DE85256DE4006272A1

Page 3: How Can You Save $8 Million per Year?

37. Port of Houston Authority Webpage, “General Information,” www.portofhouston.com/geninfo/overview1.html

38. Parsons Transportation Group and Texas Transportation Institute, Estimation of Benefits of Houston 

 TranStar, Houston, TX: February 1997. ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/0/0B37A6D584E620B2852569610051E268

39. Ibid.

40. Ibid.

Page 3: Trends in Detection and Verification

41. Federal Highway Administration, “Incident Management,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Trendsgraph.asp?comp=IM

42. Ibid.

43. Federal Highway Administration, “Freeway Incident Detection and Verification Via CCTV: 2004 

 National Summary,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Results.asp?ID=432&rpt=M&filter=1&sort=NumCCTV&Year=2004

44. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices: 

 A Cross-Cutting Study, Washington, DC: April 2000, p. 16. 

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

45. Fenno, David W. and Michael A. Ogden, “Freeway Services Patrols: A State of the Practice,” 

 paper presented at the 77th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

 Washington, DC, January 1998. ITS Benefits Database Entry: 

 www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/0/2B94636876E370D9852569610051E2DE

46. Federal Highway Administration, “Incident Management,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/Trendsgraph.asp?comp=IM

47. Federal Highway Administration, “National Summary,” ITS Deployment Statistics Database Entry: 

 www.itsdeployment.its.dot.gov/FactSheet.asp

48. Ibid.

Page 4: Managing Traffic Incidents – Lessons from Experience

	 Traffic Incident Management Program Development

49. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, 

 Washington, DC: April 2000. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: 

 www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&032E7396049034CE8525718F0062E879

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, 

 cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org). Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

50. Ibid. 

51. Transportation Research Board, NCHRP Report 520: Sharing Information between 

 Public Safety and Transportation Agencies for Traffic Incident Management, Washington, DC: 2004. 

 ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&826BE97F5DE1F88F852570A60060F5A1

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Aimee Flannery, Ph.D., P.E., George Mason University, 

 703-993-1738, aflanner@gmu.edu). Report: onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_520.pdf
TRAFFIC INCIDENT MANAGEMENT

14

	 Incident Detection, Verification, and Response

52. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study, 

 Washington, DC: April 2000. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&457366209E8D9BEA8525718F00648AA1 (Lesson learned point of contact: 

 Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org).

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

53. Federal Highway Administration, Computer-Aided Dispatch - Traffic Management Center Field Operational 

 Test Final Report, Washington State, Washington, DC: 2003. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: 

 www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&BCC1F2BF48F9AE908525725F0061DF01

 (Lesson learned point of contact: Carolina Burnier, Mitretek Systems, 202-488-1503, 

 carolina.burnier@mitretek.org). Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/14325.htm

54. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices, A Cross-Cutting Study,

 Washington, DC: April 2000. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&457366209E8D9BEA8525718F00648AA1(Lesson learned point of contact: 

 Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org).

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

55. Ibid. 

	 Incident Clearance and Evaluation

56. Federal Highway Administration, Improving Mobility, Saving Lives – Safety Service Patrols,

 Washington, DC: 1999. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&1370BC7CE41A9B2A8525707E0061C639 (Lesson learned point of contact: 

 Allan DeBlasio, U.S. DOT / RITA / John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center, 617-494-2032, 

 allan.j.deblasio@volpe.dot.gov). Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/brochure/6872.pdf

57. Federal Highway Administration, Intelligent Transportation Systems Field Operational Test Cross-Cutting 

 Study: Incident Management: Detection, Verification, and Traffic Management, Washington, DC: 

 September 1998. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/benecost.nsf/

 Lesson?OpenForm&3450D6377A6818148525707E0061C49D (Lesson learned point of contact: Dave Helman, 

 FHWA, 202-366-8042, david.helman@dot.gov). Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/6328.pdf

58. Ibid., p.12.

59. Federal Highway Administration, Incident Management Successful Practices: A Cross-Cutting Study,

 Washington, DC: April 2000. ITS Lessons Learned Knowledge Resource Entry: www.itslessons.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/Lesson?OpenForm&A636DFCF4D1A89278525718F00661959 (Lesson learned point of contact: 

 Cheryl Lowrance, Mitretek Systems, 202-863-2986, cheryl.lowrance@mitretek.org).

 Report: www.itsdocs.fhwa.dot.gov/jpodocs/repts_te/11484.pdf

Pages 1 and Page 4: San Antonio Reduces Response Times by 20 Percent

60. Henk, Russel H., et al., “Before-and-After Analysis of the San Antonio TransGuide System,” 

 paper presented at the 76th Annual Meeting of the Transportation Research Board, 

 Washington, DC, January 1997. ITS Benefits Database Entry: www.itsbenefits.its.dot.gov/its/

 benecost.nsf/0/6653718EFFE52A5C852569610051E27F

61. Ibid.

62. Ibid.

63. Ibid.

64. Ibid.