Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis (2023)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

D-1   A P P E N D I X D Contents D-2 Introduction and Background D-2 Objective D-2 Methodology D-2 Workshops D-4 Final Roadmap Overview D-4 Research Problem Statements Overview—by Thematic Lane D-4 Research Problem Statements—by Roadmap Phase Research Problem Statements

D-2 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis Introduction and Background Under NCHRP Project 23-09, “Scoping Study to Develop the Basis for a Highway Standard to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis,” the research team conducted a litera- ture review, gap assessment, and stakeholder engagement to solicit feedback in support of the roadmap to develop the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual as follows: • Literature Review and Gap Assessment—February 17, 2021 • Stakeholder engagements—March and April 2021 and September 22, 2021 A research roadmap is a high-level document that guides the development of a research pro- gram by (1) identifying the gaps that need to be addressed, (2) defining the research questions that will satisfy the gaps, and (3) developing the timeline for investigating the research questions. The following sections describe the methodology the research team employed for developing the roadmap and research problem statements (RPSs). Objective The objective roadmap to develop the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is to pro- vide long-term guidance on research and development activities for the purpose of developing a framework for a quantitative, all-hazards risk and resilience assessment program. Methodology Based on the literature review and gap assessment conducted in Task 2, the research team identified knowledge gaps that can be classified into three thematic lanes: • Organizational Development, Outreach, and Implementation • Risk and Resilience Assessment Processes • Technology and Tools The research team compiled feedback from stakeholder engagements to develop 12 draft RPSs and two research roadmap options. The two options were presented at the September 2021 virtual workshop. Workshops The stakeholder engagements gathered feedback from a variety of transportation profes- sionals familiar with risk and resilience concepts to aid the research team in defining the content and prioritization of future research in pursuit of a research roadmap to advance the practice of risk and resilience assessment in state departments of transportation (DOTs) and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs). The research team presented two research roadmap options with the corresponding RPSs to stakeholders from U.S. DOT, FHWA, and academia during the September workshop for discussion and feedback. As part of the workshop, the attendees participated on an interactive session where each participant was be able to provide editorial input to the RPSs as well brainstorm topics by thematic lane and map those topics with the existing RPSs. Based on the feedback obtained during the workshop, the research team reviewed the original set of RPSs to incorporate the participant feedback. Since all the topics provided during this activity were matched with an existing RPS, there was no need to create new RPSs. Figure D-1 shows a screenshot of the interactive Mural activity.

Figure D-1. RPS topics and mapping exercise.

D-4 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis Final Roadmap Overview A final research roadmap to develop and implement the Highway R&R Manual was devel- oped incorporating feedback from the project panel, the TRB Committee on Transportation Asset Management (AJE30), the AASHTO liaison for this project as well as multiple other stakeholders. The original roadmap proposed by the research team was revised to accommo- date a 7-year roadmap divided into three phases with products for each phase. Phase 1 focuses on the development of assessment methodologies and the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. Phase 2 focuses on testing the manual and developing agency capacity building to facilitate implementation of risk- and resilience-focused initiatives. Phase 3 accommodates the development of tools and a revision of the final Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and capacity building. The revised roadmap was discussed and approved by the project panel during a panel meeting on October 6, 2021. The final roadmap with corresponding RPSs is shown in Figure D-2. The roadmap and corresponding RPSs were utilized to create a Research Needs State- ment (RNS) for consideration by the TRB Committee on Transportation Asset Management (AJE30). The dash-lined boxes in Figure D-2 represent opportunities to bundle selected projects to enhance project continuity and efficiency (i.e., Phase 1 and Phase 3 projects can potentially be bundled into single projects as shown in the figure). Research Problem Statements Overview— by Thematic Lane The proposed RPSs for each key knowledge gap/thematic lane for NCHRP Project 23-09 are listed by thematic lane in Figure D-3. Research Problem Statements—by Roadmap Phase The proposed RPSs for each phase of the roadmap are as follows: Phase 1—Develop the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual • RPS B1. Establishing a Quantitative Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment Methodology for High- way Assets • RPS B2. Developing a Historical Data Capture Process and System for Risk and Resilience (R&R) Assessments • RPS B3. Establishing a Quantitative Resilience Assessment Methodology for Transportation Highway Assets • RPS B4. Establishing Considerations for Defining Risk and Resilience Thresholds and Methodologies for the Selection of Risk Mitigation and Resilience Improvement Strategies for Highway Infrastructure Phase 2—Pilot Test and Implement the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual • RPS A1. Creating Internal and External Agency Communication and Collaboration Practices to Effectively Implement Risk and Resilience (R&R) Approaches and Management • RPS A2. Developing a Capacity Building Plan to Identify Institutional and Individual Needs to Effectively Conduct Risk and Resilience (R&R) Assessments at Transportation Agencies • RPS A3. Pilot Testing the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Interface with Existing Asset Management Systems and Other Agency Functions

AD O PT IO N O F HI G HW AY R IS K AN D RE SI LI EN CE (R &R ) M AN UA LA. ORGANIZATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, OUTREACH, AND IMPLEMENTATION B. RISK & RESILIENCE ASSESSMENT PROCESSES C. TECHNOLOGY & TOOLS Note: RPS titles are abbreviated versions of the full titles. Figure D-2. Final research roadmap.

D-6 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • RPS A4. Identifying Institutional, Organizational, and Procedural (IOP) Changes and Imple- mentation Strategies for the Successful Adoption of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual Phase 3—Develop Tools and Revise the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual • RPS A5. Enhancing the Capacity Building and Implementation Plans to Incorporate the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Tools • RPS A6. Revising the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual • RPS C1. Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Risk Assessments for Highway Assets • RPS C2. Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Resilience Assessments for Highway Assets Figure D-3. RPSs for the roadmap to develop the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. O rgan ization al D evelop m en t, O u treach , an d Im p lem en tation R isk an d R esilien ce A ssessm en t P rocess T ech n ology & T ools K n ow led ge G ap s A1. Creating Internal and External Agency Communication and Collaboration Practices to Effectively Implement Risk and Resilience (R&R) Approaches and Management R P S s A2. Developing a Capacity Building Plan to Identify Institutional and Individual Needs to Effectively Conduct Risk and Resiliency (R&R) Assessments at Transportation Agencies A3. Pilot Testing the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Interface with Existing Asset Management Systems and Other Agency Functions A4. Identifying Institutional, Organizational, and Procedural (IOP) Changes and Implementation Strategies for the Successful Adoption of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual A5. Enhancing the Capacity Building and Implementation Plans to Incorporate the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Tools A6. Revising the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual B1. Establishing a Quantitative Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment Methodology for Highway Assets B2. Developing a Historical Data Capture Process and System for Risk and Resilience (R&R) Assessments B3. Establishing a Quantitative Resilience Assessment Methodology for Transportation Highway Assets B4. Establishing Considerations for Defining Risk and Resilience Thresholds and Methodologies for the Selection of Risk Mitigation and Resilience Improvement Strategies for Highway Infrastructure C1. Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Risk Assessments for Highway Assets C2. Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Resilience Assessments for Highway Assets L an e A L an e B L an e C

Research Problem Statements D-7 American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY (TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS B1) Establishing a Quantitative Multi-Hazard Risk Assessment Methodology for Highway Assets 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH MAP-21 and FAST legislation have compelled transportation agencies to incorporate risk assessment into their Transportation Asset Management Plans (TAMPs). Moreover, the passage of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIJA) requires the USDOT to establish an intergovernmental risk and system resilience assessment process. However, the risk assessment methodologies most employed in the past tended to rely on qualitative methods, such as risk registers and heat maps. Unfortunately, qualitative methods do not support economic analysis of alternative adaptation strategies and, therefore, are inadequate for asset or project-level analysis, or any situation where economic analysis is required. Some transportation agencies have started to develop their own risk assessment methodologies and processes, but the state of practice varies on the maturity of development and incorporation of these processes. State DOTs and metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) have highlighted the need for better and standardized processes that help them conduct a risk assessment of their assets and networks. This research will cover the top priority threats/hazards and highway assets identified in previous studies. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP as well as FHWA. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products that address collaboration and communications strategies within the transportation sector: • NCHRP Project 08-118, “Risk Assessment Techniques for Transportation Asset Management” • NCHRP Project 20-125, “Strategies for Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Networks” • NCHRP Project 15-61, “Applying Climate Change Information to Hydrologic and Hydraulic Design of Transportation Infrastructure” • NCHRP Web-Only Document 107: Risk-Based Management Guidelines for Scour at Bridges with Unknown Foundations • NCHRP Project 15-80, “Design Guide and Standards for Infrastructure Resilience” • NCHRP Project 20-06/Topic 25-03, “Managing Enhanced Risk in the Mega Project Era” • NCHRP Synthesis 494: Life-Cycle Cost Analysis for Management of Highway Assets • NCHRP Project 20-59(51)A, “Security 101: A Physical & Cyber Security Primer for Transportation Agencies” • NCHRP Report 706: Uses of Risk Management and Data Management to Support Target-Setting for Performance-Based Resource Allocation by Transportation Agencies • NCHRP Report 483: Bridge Life-Cycle Cost Analysis • NCHRP Project 20-24(74), “Executive Strategies for Risk Management by State Departments of Transportation” • NCHRP Project 20-59(56), “Support for State DOT Transportation Systems Resilience and All-Hazards Programs”

D-8 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to supplement current and past efforts of NCHRP projects and state of practice among transportation agencies to develop quantitative, repeatable methodologies for conducting quantitative risk assessments for top priority threats/hazards for highway assets identified in previous work. Utilizing the conceptual framework for risk and resilience assessment for highway assets developed in NCHRP Project 23-09 this research will: • Assess the current state of practice on the process and incorporation of risk assessments for highway assets through literature review, stakeholder interviews, and a national survey. State of practice should include risk and resilience models, metrics, tools, etc. • Apply the conceptual framework for risk assessment for highway assets to create a guidance document to help transportation agencies to quantitatively conduct risk assessments to highway assets. • Develop a risk assessment purpose and need matrix that maps the existing use of risk and resilience assessment efforts to the intended purpose and address success, challenges, and needs. • Identify existing criticality assessment criteria, methodologies, and metrics for highway assets/networks that can be used on the development of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. • Identify data needs and sources. • Identify and develop methodologies for identification and threat/hazard characterization including threat thresholds/severity. • Identify and develop methodologies for vulnerability analysis of a wide range of highway asset classes (pavement, bridge, culvert, ITS, etc.) • Identify and develop multi-hazard approaches to risk assessment to account for the multiplicative effects of cascading and interactive threats. • Develop a methodology for agency selection of top priority threat and asset combinations to conduct risk and resilience assessments. • Create working groups based on Subject Matter Experts (SMEs) from different state DOTs related to the different threats and asset selected for this study. SMEs will participate in multiple workshops to help develop and validate the different methodologies. • Develop/establish methodologies for a quantitative assessment of: – Threat Frequency/Probabilities – Asset Vulnerability/Probabilities – Asset Valuation – Quantitative Consequences estimation • Examine the incorporation of climate change projections into the risk assessments where applicable. 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS While there are existing projects that address the subject of integrating risk and resilience concepts into agency practice, so far, there are no projects that discuss quantitative risk assessment methodologies in depth with standardized methodologies. Considering emerging threats, DOTs repeatedly have expressed an urgent need for new methods, metrics, tools, and resources for conducting quantitative risk assessments of the transportation system. This project will help fill this gap with guidance on standardized methodologies for risk assessment. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS In order to implement new risk assessment methodologies, senior executives and policy makers need to take the lead and champion these initiatives. Similarly, program managers need to take the major role in encouraging the implementation of new strategies at the program level. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Existing processes can be found in Transportation Agency Management Plans which typically include a section devoted to risk management and the agency’s risk register. Many DOTs also follow FHWA’s Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Framework. With respect to tools and technology, most DOTs have GIS to map and assess natural threats. In addition, the federal government offers a variety of tools, such as FHWA’s Vulnerability Assessment Scoring Tool (VAST) and FEMA’s HAZUS. Transportation agencies retain their own asset inventories, inspection records, and in some cases, custom-made hazard maps. However, federal and state agencies, for example, the U.S. Geological Survey (USGS), the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), and U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) provide public access to a broad selection of natural hazard layers.

Research Problem Statements D-9 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $1.5 M to $2 M. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 1) is approximately 40%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 24 to 36 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 3-year Phase 1 roadmap [to begin on year 1 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is developed]. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449 -2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by the NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-10 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS B2) Developing a Historical Data Capture Process and System for Risk and Resilience (R&R) Assessments 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Surveys of state DOTs reveal one of the barriers to conducting quantitative risk and resilience assessments is the uncertainty surrounding the likelihood and physical and operational consequences from past adverse events. Further, transportation agencies generally do not have adequate databases or recording mechanisms for tracking such events. A frequently cited barrier to quantitative risk modeling is insufficient data for determining threat likelihoods, vulnerability, and consequences. Having a mechanism in place to capture data from events as they occur would help transportation agencies derive the threat frequencies, vulnerabilities, and consequences needed for quantitative risk models. This research will strive to develop a framework for recording and sharing historical data. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products on quantitative methods of analysis for threats to asset condition and performance as well as those that worked to provide guidance on how to incorporate such analyses into decision-making processes: • NCHRP Report 800: Successful Practices in GIS-Based Asset Management, Implementation Guide: Capitalizing on GIS and Asset Management • NCHRP Project 20-45, “Scientific Approaches to Transportation Research” • NCHRP Project 25-25(90), “Application of Geographic Information Systems for Historic Properties” • NCHRP Synthesis 508: Data Management and Governance Practices 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to develop a historical data capture process and system to support risk and resilience modeling and assessments. Subtasks of this research include: • Conduct of a state-of-practice review and gap assessment on how agencies collect and manage data from adverse events. • Develop processes and tools for capturing past adverse events. • Develop a data dictionary and database schema for risk and resilience assessment. • Develop an risk and resilience management database that facilitates the searching and sharing of threat, asset, consequence, and other relevant attribute data. 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS DOTs have stressed the need for more data, tools, and metrics to assist in risk and resilience assessments. DOTs are substantially more capable of conducting quantitative risk and resilience assessments if they can aggregate their own maintenance and emergency repair data as well as develop a collection plan to collect pre- and post-event data. A program for historical data capture will help DOTs derive the key variables needed for risk and resilience assessment. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS To implement this data process, DOTs will have to consider the requirements (business areas, data required), assess existing data management capabilities and infrastructure, and define the technical aspects of the new or modified system for historical data capture. A flexible approach to adapting existing systems will greatly mitigate the level of effort as opposed to developing an entirely new data management system. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? DOTs have asset management systems and data management systems (database, GIS) that can be leveraged to support a historical data capture program.

Research Problem Statements D-11 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $200,000 to $250,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 1) is approximately 10%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 12 to 18 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 3-year Phase 1 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 2 or 3 of the roadmap. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128  9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-12 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS B3) Establishing a Quantitative Resilience Assessment Methodology for Transportation Highway Assets 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Traditionally, transportation planning has focused on addressing regularly occurring and observable disruptions while less attention has been given to less frequent, unpredictable events. However, in recent years more research has been devoted to resilience analysis of transportation networks to optimize emergency management and accelerate restoration schedules. AASHTO defines resiliency as, “the ability to prepare and plan for, absorb, recover from, or more successfully adapt to adverse events.” Risk management focuses on mitigating vulnerabilities, and resilience management emphasizes rapid recovery and adaptation, and there is a high correlation. While transportation agencies regularly incorporate risk assessments in their transportation asset management plans, recent surveys indicate few agencies have conducted resilience assessments or developed resilience metrics. Findings from NCHRP Synthesis 527: Resilience in Transportation Planning, Engineering, Management, Policy, and Administration,” published in 2018, demonstrated there is a lack of understanding of how risk is related to resilience. In addition, it shows there is a need for more standardized resilience metrics and assessment methodologies that can help transportation agencies to understand the benefits of conducting these assessments and incorporating them into regular practice. Recognizing the importance of resilience practices in the transportation sector, TRB published a report “Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices.” The report presents the importance and challenges of maintaining a resilient transportation system and provides a review of practices by transportation agencies for evaluating resilience and conducting economic analysis to justify these investments. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as TRB. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products on the quantitative methods of analysis for threats to asset condition and performance as well as those that provide guidance on how to incorporate such analyses into decision-making processes: • TRB Special Report 340: Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices • NCHRP Project 20-125, “Strategies for Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Networks” • NCHRP Project 15-80, “Design Guide and Standards for Infrastructure Resilience” • NCHRP Project 08-36/Task 146, “Economic Resilience and Long-Term Highway/Transportation Infrastructure Investment” • NCHRP Project 08-129, “Incorporating Resilience Concepts and Strategies in Transportation Planning” • NCHRP Report 525: Surface Transportation Security, Volume 11: Disruption Impact Estimating Tool— Transportation (DIETT): A Tool for Prioritizing High-Value Transportation Choke Points • NCHRP Project 20-59(14)C, “Strategic Plan Implementation Support Services for SCOTSEM” Product: Understanding Transportation Resilience: A 2016-2018 Roadmap • NCHRP Research Report 976: Resilience Primer for Transportation Executives • NCHRP Project 20-59(56), “Support for State DOT Transportation Systems Resilience and All-Hazards Programs” • NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide

Research Problem Statements D-13 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to develop quantitative resilience assessment methodologies and metrics for transportation highway assets. This study will include: • Assess the current state of practice on the process and incorporation of resilience assessments for highway assets through literature review, stakeholder interviews, and a national survey. State of practice should include risk and resilience models, metrics, tools, etc.  • Develop a resilience assessment purpose and need matrix that maps the existing use of resilience assessment efforts to the intended purpose and address success, challenges, and needs.  • Develop a methodology to estimate resilience assessments building on the developed risk assessment methodologies and framework from NCHRP Project 23-09 RPS B1 and any new findings. Incorporate the relationship between risk and resilience when developing the resilience methodology. • Develop guidance explaining the relationship between risk and resilience assessments. • Identify data needs and sources. • Develop guidance on methodologies for assessing network resilience and the appropriate metrics for commonly examined dimensions of resilience (e.g., safety, redundancy, adaptability, mobility, recovery, etc.) 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS Recent scans have revealed that the terms “risk” and “resilience” are often used interchangeably or lumped together. In addition, there is no universal metric or set of metrics for resilience. However, DOTs have repeatedly expressed an urgent need for resilience metrics and assessment methodologies that extend beyond high-level approaches. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Competing priorities, insufficient resources, lack of perceived benefits, and lack of leadership are frequently cited barriers to the implementation of new risk and resilience management initiatives. Leadership buy-in is crucial to successful implementation as well as interagency communication and collaboration. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Staff training, workshops, and agency guidance help coordinate the development of the resilience assessment program. GIS, data from maintenance and TIMS, and network modeling will support the pilot testing of resilience assessment metrics and methodologies. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $400,000 to $500,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 1) is approximately 30%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 3-year Phase 1 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 1 of the program. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematic, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-14 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS B4) Establishing Considerations for Defining Risk and Resilience Thresholds and Methodologies for the Selection of Risk Mitigation and Resilience Improvement Strategies for Highway Infrastructure 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH The National Highway Performance Program (23 U.S. Code § 119) compels transportation agencies to implement a risk-based asset management program. The first step toward managing an agency’s risk is identifying the agency’s risk appetite. Risk appetite is the cost that an agency is willing to absorb over a specific period of time to pursue objectives while risk thresholds are decision points that trigger a response when a certain level of risk has been reached. During multiple workshops for NCHRP projects, transportation professionals have frequently expressed a need for guidance on determining risk appetite and risk thresholds. It is important for a transportation agency to understand its appetite for risk to manage the balance between spending and being overly cautious to investment. Risk thresholds are the quantitative measures needed to keep an agency within its risk appetite. In addition, there is a need for more standardized methodologies to help state DOTs identify the most appropriate risk mitigation or resilience improvement strategies. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as TRB. Below is a list of some NCHRP products relevant to risk management. • NCHRP Synthesis 494: Life-Cycle Cost Analysis for Management of Highway Assets • NCHRP Report 938: Incorporating the Costs and Benefits of Adaptation Measures in Preparation for Extreme Weather Events and Climate Change—Guidebook 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The intended outcome of this research project is to improve a DOT’s decision- making when selecting mitigation by providing guidance on metrics and methodologies for assessing a DOT’s risk tolerance. Supporting tasks for this research project include: • Develop a process to aid organizations in the development of risk targets, risk tolerance, and risk thresholds (boundaries of acceptable risk) for strategic, programmatic, and daily operational risks. • Develop a decision-making process for determining what actions are taken when thresholds of acceptable risk are exceeded. • Develop the business case for supporting the use of risk thresholds (i.e., communicate the benefit of establishing risk thresholds to decision-makers). • Develop guidance on strategic investment decision-making to include when to cease investing in assets that are either under-used or the cost of maintaining is no longer cost-effective. • Develop a synthesis of the current practice for economic analysis (e.g., cost-benefit analysis, multi- criteria analysis, triple-dividend, etc.) . • Provide practical guidance on selection of risk mitigation and resilience improvement strategies: mitigate, transfer, avoidance, acceptance. • Provide practical guidance on selecting the best approach for project appraisal. • Provide parameter selection. • Provide analytical steps. • Provide metrics [e.g., net present value (NPV), internal rate or return, cost-effectiveness, etc.].

Research Problem Statements D-15 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS In the face of climate change, federal mandates, and the challenge of prioritizing limited resources, DOTs have repeatedly expressed a need for more tools, methodologies, and metrics for risk and resilience assessment. On November 16, 2021, President Biden signed the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (IIA), recognizing that building resilience into the nation’s infrastructure is critical to the nation. In light of the non-stationarity of climate change, DOTs are finding that a rigid approach to design is no longer realistic. Instead, DOTs need to take a risk management approach and reassess the resilience of their systems, periodically, over time. The first step in developing this risk management approach is establishing risk targets or tolerances for their assets. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Implementation starts with leadership evaluating the organization’s maturity in terms of knowledge, capabilities, tools, methodologies, and data, followed by a plan to address any implementation gaps. Leadership buy-in will be necessary to overcome any institutional barriers to implementation, such as staff attitudes, lack of training, lack of resources, and technical problems. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Transportation agencies can begin with existing agency risk assessment methodologies (e.g., risk registers) and performance metrics from the agency’s Transportation Asset Management Plan. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $250,000 to $300,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 1) is approximately 20%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 12 to 18 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 3-year Phase 1 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 2 or 3 of the program. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematic, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128  9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-16 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A1) Creating Internal and External Agency Communication and Collaboration Practices to Effectively Implement Risk and Resilience (R&R) Approaches and Management 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Effective implementation of risk and resilience approaches and management are integrated throughout a transportation agency and involves senior leadership, data and tools resources, and performance and asset management efforts. Performance and asset management processes are typically more mature in their development and can benefit by improving and collaborating risk and resilience efforts. However, the development and integration of risk and resilience are less mature in most agencies. Collaboration and communication among different areas and groups within an agency (e.g., asset management, design, operations, maintenance, IT, etc.) helps with information and data sharing and are key for risk and resilience implementation. Similarly, collaboration with external agencies, such as Metropolitan Planning Organizations (MPOs), cities, and environmental and science groups among many other agencies will also facilitate data and information sharing for conducting risk and resilience assessments. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as FHWA and a few state DOTs. Below is a list of some relevant NCHRP projects and products that address collaboration and communications strategies within the transportation sector: • • NCHRP Research Report 985: Integrating Effective Transportation Performance, Risk, and Asset Management Practices • NCHRP Project 20-127, “Business Case and Communications Strategies for State DOT Resilience Efforts” • NCHRP Project 08-128, “Snapshots of Planning Practice” • NCHRP Project 20-24(74), “Executive Strategies for Risk Management by State Departments of Transportation” • NCHRP Project 20-59(55), “Transportation System Resilience: CEO Primer & Engagement” • NCHRP Project 08-36/Task 142, “Guidebook for Multi-Agency Collaboration for Sustainability and Resilience” • NCHRP Project 08-129, “Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Planning” The proposed program of projects would work to integrate this research and extend methods for collaboration and communicating risk and resilience into a single manual to ease the burden of seeking information from disparate sources. 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to develop effective internal and external communication and collaboration practices transportation agencies have implemented and develop guidance on promoting and enhancing these practices. The specific research tasks to accomplish the main objective include: • Conduct a state-of-practice review of communication and collaboration practices, policies, strategies and tools through literature review and stakeholder engagement. • Conduct a gap assessment of existing practices and how they are responding to the objectives behind risk and resilience efforts at transportation agencies. • Conduct case studies of successful communication and collaboration practices applied in existing situations and follow up with relevant transportation agencies using stakeholder interviews to define the reasons and means by which the practices were successful. NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide

Research Problem Statements D-17 • Perform a qualitative assessment of identified and classified practices. • Develop strategies for communication and collaboration within multi-disciplinary agency groups as well as with other agencies to implement Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and management framework. • Develop strategies to facilitate media outreach. • Develop strategies for communicating uncertainty in risk and resilience models and assessments. • Develop strategies for facilitating internal collaboration across functional areas and divisions. • Develop strategies for facilitating external collaboration with stakeholders and partners. 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS From the literature review, there does not seem to be any previous or ongoing research focusing on this topic. Communities across the nation are facing multiple shocks from extreme weather, disasters, and climate change. Improved communication and collaboration between transportation agencies and stakeholders shortens response times and speeds up recovery from adverse events. In contrast, the absence of a plan for communications and collaboration risks prolonging recovery and increasing the pain suffered by the local community. This project will help state DOTs more effectively organize to collaborate on complex problems as well as communicate risk and resilience management objectives and the use of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual with stakeholders and partners. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS To implement new collaboration and communications strategies, senior executives and policy makers need to take the lead and champion these initiatives. Similarly, program managers need to take the major role in encouraging the implementation of new strategies at the program level. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? It is key that senior executives, policy makers and program managers need to have a plan to communicate with peers to effectively integrate risk management. Additional products and activities, like training workshops to increase the integration of risk management into maintenances practices as well as peer exchanges and informative presentations can help state DOTs positively impact their organization. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $250,000 to $300,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 2) is approximately 20%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 2 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 4 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is developed. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-18 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • Assess available training programs in academic or professional development forums and their alignment in providing the skills necessary for a more mature development and assessment of risk and resilience. • Provide guidance with recommendations on risk and resilience skills and development programs available, being developed, and needing to be developed to provide effective individual support in necessary skills training. • Develop training material for agencies to implement the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. • Develop a train-the-trainer program. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A2) Developing a Capacity Building Plan to Identify Institutional and Individual Needs to Effectively Conduct Risk and Resilience (R&R) Assessments at Transportation Agencies 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Recent state-of-the-practice reviews have revealed that transportation agency staff are not adequately trained or in possession of the necessary data or institutional support to effectively conduct risk and resilience assessments. Extreme weather, climate change, pandemics, and cyber security breaches have spotlighted the need for greater investment in risk and resilience research. Part of this research should focus on assisting transportation agencies to cultivate the resources they need to effectively conduct risk and resilience assessments. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as FHWA. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products: • NCHRP Project 20-105B, “Development of Course Outlines for Ahead of the Curve Training Program: Mastering the Management of Transportation Research” • NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide • NCRHP Synthesis 362: Training Programs, Processes, Policies, and Practices • NCHRP Project 20-24(95), “Transportation Agency Capability Building Web-Based Guide Quick Reference” • NCHRP Project 20-125, “Strategies for Incorporating Resilience into the Transportation Network” 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to develop a capacity building plan to identify and develop adequate training, guidance, and the leadership support (funding, interagency collaboration, data procurement) that transportation agencies need to make implementation and training of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual feasible and effective. The specific research tasks to accomplish the main objective include: • Explore best practices in institutional training programs and data collaboration policies both within risk and resilience as well as more mature management practices, such as asset management. • Use agency interviews and peer exchange to investigate individual and institutional gaps and needs in staff skills and program policies and structure.

Research Problem Statements D-19 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS While there are several past and active NCHRP projects that relate to risk and resilience assessment, so far, there do not appear to be any projects that have focused on the topic of capacity building for risk and resilience assessment. In the face of increasing threats, aging infrastructure, and limited resources, there is a pressing need from agencies for processes and tools to build their capacity for conducting more robust risk and resilience assessments. Without adequate capacity, transportation agencies will struggle in their planning efforts to effectively address challenges to their system's resilience. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Developing a capacity and resource plan is the responsibility of executives, key leadership, and program managers. DOTs need to communicate across functional areas to determine the existing capacity and resource needs of their respective departments and consider all types of organizational capacity, including leadership, management, and technical. All capacity building activities benefit from having champions who have capacity building as a top priority. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Recommended sources and support for capacity building include training and workshops, peer exchanges, consultancies, university research centers, and professional organizations like AASHTO. In addition, DOTs should leverage in-house expertise and existing knowledge management and data management systems to share information and tools, host online training, etc. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $250,000 to $300,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 2) is approximately 20%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 2 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 4 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is developed. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-20 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis The proposed program of projects would serve to support managing the testing and validation of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual by DOTs. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A3) Pilot Testing the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Interface with Existing Asset Management Systems and Other Agency Functions 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH NCHRP Project 23-09 RPS B1, RPS B3, and RPS B4 will result in the development of methodologies for conducting risk and resilience analysis for highway assets to be integrated with existing systems for more efficient use. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as FHWA and used in the development of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. In addition, similar NCHRP studies have also pilot tested the development of guidance under the NCHRP Project 20-44, “Implementation Support Program.” Two similar pilot studies include NCHRP Project 20-44(23) that pilot tests the Climate Change Design Practices Guide for Hydrology and Hydraulics developed under NCHRP Project 15-61, and NCHRP Project 20-44(41) that pilot tests the Deployment of Transportation Resilience Practices in State DOTs developed under NCHRP Project 20-117. 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this implementation project is to conduct pilot tests in concert with several state Departments of Transportation (DOTs) to determine the effectiveness and ease of implementation of the risk and resilience assessment methodologies for highway assets developed for the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. The project will: • Select state DOTs to participate in the pilots. Selection of state DOTs will be based on the range of threats and highway assets included in that Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual as well as an agency’s maturity of conducting risk and resilience assessments. • Assist and guide state DOT to conduct the pilot projects and the application of the different developed methodologies as applicable. • Conduct a survey to assess the level of effort and understanding of the methodologies when conducting the pilots. • Conduct multiple workshops with state DOTs participating in the pilots. • Conduct a robust evaluation of the methodologies against a consistent set of metrics, illuminating the refinements needed to improve the product. • Propose revisions and refinements of the methodologies on the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual.

Research Problem Statements D-21 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS From the literature review, there does not seem to be any previous or ongoing research that tests the implementation of a standard for highway risk and resilience assessment. Recent scans of DOTs have revealed an urgent need for new risk and resilience assessment methodologies, tools, and technologies. Numerous active projects will advance the transportation sector’s understanding of the risk and resilience process; however, this will require validation of the new approaches. This project will provide opportunities to transportation agencies to exercise the methodologies from the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and provides feedback that will prove invaluable for refining the manual. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Testing the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual will require leadership buy-in and risk and resilience champions within the agency to make the case for implementing new methodologies and to organize the necessary collaboration and communication required to manage the complexities of the task. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? DOTs can leverage experiences from their existing practices found in their risk-based asset management plans, as well as experience from participation in FHWA-sponsored risk and resilience studies or other similar efforts. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $450,000 to $500,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 2) is approximately 40%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 2 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 4 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is developed. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-22 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • Make a business case for integrating risk and resilience results into DOT practices and decision-support systems by demonstrating the needs and benefits of the proposed IOP changes. • Illustrate how agencies can assess and transition from their current legacy IOP arrangements to a risk- and-resilience-informed framework. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A4) Identifying Institutional, Organizational, and Procedural (IOP) Changes and Implementation Strategies for the Successful Adoption of Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Mainstreaming and integrating risk and resilience assessments into DOT practices will require changes to DOT’s IOP arrangements from existing traditional programmatic approaches to incorporate risk-informed decision- making and enhanced resilience as the frequency, intensity, and scope of disruptions increase. Effective integration of risk and resilience assessment results into decision-making will require the identification of risk- informed and resilience-sensitive actions to make DOT functions more responsive and agile to emerging needs and conditions. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process, TRB, and FHWA research. Below is a list of some of the more relevant FHWA and NCHRP projects and products: • NCHRP Project 08-36/Task 144, “Transportation Asset Management and Effective Organizational Models for Program Implementation” • NCHRP Research Report 985: Integrating Effective Transportation Performance, Risk, and Asset Management Practices • NCHRP Project 20-59(54), “Transportation System Resilience: Research Roadmap and White Papers” • NCHRP Project 20-59(55), “Transportation System Resilience: CEO Primer & Engagement” • • FHWA Integrating Natural-Hazard Resilience into Transportation Planning—White Paper on Literature Review Findings • TRB Special Report 340: Investing in Transportation Resilience: A Framework for Informed Choices 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The object of is this research is to recommend IOP changes and provide transportation agencies with strategies and tools for successful adoption of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. The specific research tasks to accomplish the main objective include: • Conduct a review of best practices for implementation and development strategies. • Develop an action plan for a systematic integration of the results of risk and resilience assessments to transition to integrate risk management and resilience-sensitive decision-making. IOP changes will target realignment of agency processes, identify responsibility at various levels of decision-making, and highlight areas where organizational changes need to be made to augment the effectiveness of risk- and-resilience-informed DOT management practices. • Develop decision tools that align with federal funding mechanisms. NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide

Research Problem Statements D-23 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS From the literature review, there does not seem to be any previous or ongoing research focusing on the topic of organizational readiness for the implementation of new strategies for risk and resilience assessments. The willingness and capacity of all relevant stakeholders to consider new practices and support for change management needs are critical for promoting the adoption of new risk and resilience assessment methods and improving implementation outcomes. However, no research in the transportation sector currently guides the enhancement of organizational readiness for implementation. This project will help state DOTs improve their readiness for implementation of the new risk and resilience assessment strategies developed on the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual across the agency. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Organizational climate and individual attitudes can be barriers to the successful implementation of new initiatives. To implement new IOP strategies, senior executives and policy makers need to take the lead and champion these initiatives. Similarly, program managers need to take a major role in encouraging the implementation of new strategies at the program level. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Agency Standard Operating Procedures (SOP) and policies, organizational structure, and collaborative activities, such as workshops and Delphi sessions, could support successful implementation. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $250,000 to $300,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 2) is approximately 20%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 2 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 4 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is developed. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-24 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • Conduct multi-state DOT pilot study implementations of the training plan and materials. • Conduct an evaluation of the pilot studies. • Develop a follow-on train-the-trainer course. 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS The focus of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is demonstrating methodologies and tools for conducting quantitative risk and resilience assessments. Guidance is needed to ensure the successful implementation of this manual. This will require guidance on how to integrate the manual into agency practices as well as training for engineers and planners on employing the methodologies and tools described in the manual. The Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual will be a major step toward advancing the state of the practice of risk and resilience assessment within the surface transportation sector. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A5) Enhancing the Capacity Building and Implementation Plans to Incorporate the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Tools 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH This project is an enhancement of RPS A2, Developing a Capacity Building Plan to Identify Institutional and Individual Needs to Effectively Conduct Risk and Resilience Assessments at Transportation Agencies, and RPS A4, Identifying Institutional, Organizational, and Procedural (IOP) Changes and Implementation Strategies for the Successful Adoption of Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual, to include findings from RPS C1, Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Risk Assessments for Highway Assets and RPS C2, Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Resilience Assessments for Highway Assets. DOTs have expressed an urgent need for more tools for risk and resilience assessment. This project will ensure state DOTs receive the necessary training on the new tools and methodologies to ensure successful implementation and integration with agency practices and tools. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products: • NCHRP Project 08-118, “Risk Assessment Techniques for Transportation Asset Management” • NCHRP Project 20-105B, “Development of Course Outlines for Ahead of the Curve Training Program: Mastering the Management of Transportation Research” • • NCHRP Project 20-123(04), “Development of a Risk Management Strategic Plan and a Research Roadmap” • NCRHP Synthesis 362: Training Programs, Processes, Policies, and Practices • NCHRP Report 658: Guidebook on Risk Analysis Tools and Management Practices to Control Transportation Project Costs • NCHRP Project 20-24(95), “Transportation Agency Capability Building Web-Based Guide Quick Reference” 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to assist transportation agencies in developing plans for capacity building and implementation of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and associated tools. The specific research tasks to accomplish the main objective include: • Develop learning objectives and course outlines. • Develop training materials in accordance with principles of Instructional System Development (ISD). • Present draft materials to a joint working session of the NCHRP panel. NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide

Research Problem Statements D-25 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Factors that impact implementation include: • Existing policies and procedures • Technology • Data and data management • Agency leadership and culture • Previous experience with risk and resilience assessment methodologies and tools Factors that accelerate the use and implementation of quantitative risk and resilience assessment methodologies include risk and resilience champions with the agency and new policies promoting risk and resilience assessment. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? DOTs have a variety of tools for implementing training, including webinars, online training videos, workshops, peer exchanges, professional development programs, and knowledge management programs. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $150,000 to $200,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 3) is approximately 10%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 12 to 18 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 3 roadmap. This project is expected to begin in year 6 or 7 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and tools are developed and pilot tested. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-26 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS A6) Revising the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH This project builds upon the work conducted for RPSs B1, B3, B4 to develop the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual methodologies and RPS A3, Pilot Testing the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and Interface with Existing Asset Management Systems and Other Agency Functions. Pilot tests were conducted in concert with several state departments of transportation (DOTs) to determine the effectiveness and ease of implementation of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. The objective of this project is to synthesize lessons learned from the pilot tests for refining the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual as well as recommend protocols for periodic revisions of the manual (e.g., updates in climate and other environmental data and data sources, changes in regulatory requirements, new versions of cited tools, newly released tools, etc.). 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process as well as FHWA. In addition, similar NCHRP studies have also pilot tested the development of guidance under the NCHRP Project 20-44, “Implementation Support Program,” with follow-up projects to provide revisions to the original guidance document based on pilot feedback. Similar pilot studies include NCHRP Project 20-44(23) that pilot tests the Climate Change Design Practices Guide for Hydrology and Hydraulics developed under NCHRP Project 15-61 and will provide recommendations for guidance improvement and enhancement on NCHRP Project 15-61A, “Updates to the Design Practices Guide for Applying Climate Change Information to Hydrologic and Coastal Design of Transportation Infrastructure.” 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The research objective is to synthesize the recommendations from state DOTs that have tested implementation of the draft Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. The proposed implementation efforts and associated services will include the following: • Kickoff and orientation meeting for each participating agency • Virtual or On-Site Workshops with state DOTs to discuss gaps in the manual and propose solutions • Peer Exchange among DOTs to share lessons learned from the pilot tests • Recommendations for procedures and protocols for periodic update of the manual • Synthesis of results to be compiled in a final report with recommendations for improving the manual 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS This project is necessary to validate and improve on past NCHRP research and investment into development of the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. Refining the manual based on input from state DOTs will result in guidance that state DOTs can more effectively integrate with their existing practices.

Research Problem Statements D-27 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Successful implementation will require leadership and internal collaboration to get staff on board with making changes to existing practices and updating appropriate policies, documents, and procedures to reflect the new changes. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Existing agency approaches to risk and resilience assessments can be found in Transportation Asset Management Plans that include a section devoted to risk management. In addition, many agencies have special programs that focus on specific aspects of risk and resilience: geotechnical hazard management, scour management, safety, and emergency management programs. In-house data (asset inventory, hazard data, maintenance records) and GIS staff can be leveraged to implement new models. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $200,000 to $250,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 3) is approximately 10%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 12 to 18 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 3 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 6 or 7 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual and tools are developed and pilot tested. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-28 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • Develop tools for estimating asset/system criticality. • Develop tools for estimating threat likelihood. • Develop quantitative tools for assessing vulnerability to highway assets. • Develop quantitative tools for estimating direct and indirect consequences of adverse events. • Develop tools to calculate return on investment and conduct standard benefit-cost analysis. • Develop metrics and communication strategies for reporting the results of risk assessments for the purposes of planning, prioritization, screening, scoping, evaluation, etc. • Develop strategies for integrating the outputs of asset management models and systems data availability and suitability for assessments. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS C1) Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Risk Assessments for Highway Assets 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Currently, there are no standardized methods and tools to undertake risk assessments. This makes it difficult to assess risk to transportation infrastructure in a manner that can be communicated using standard sets of commonly adopted metrics. Tools that are proposed to be developed as part of this research will assess, report, and communicate the results of the assessment consistent with the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual methodologies developed in RPS B1. This research will build on the NCHRP Project 23-09 literature review on tools and technologies that are available in the state of practice to conduct risk and resilience assessments. It will also build on the gap assessment that has been conducted to address the shortfalls of existing tools in developing/choosing a quantitative methodology for implementation that is consistent and easy to communicate to a range of audiences, including decision-makers and the public as the basis for investing in resilience improvements and investments. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of risk and resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects on risk assessment for transportation. • NCHRP Project 23-24, “Develop Methods to Allow Agencies to Incorporate Quantitative Risk Assessment at Project and Network Level” • NCHRP Project 08-118, “Risk Assessment Techniques for Transportation Asset Management” • NCHRP Project 20-125, “Strategies for Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Networks” 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to identify and develop a set of practical and easy to use tools that will help implement risk assessment methodologies developed for the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual. These tools will enable implementation of risk methodologies developed during NCHRP Project 23-09 RPS B1, including scoping, assessment, evaluation, and the integration of the results into DOT’s business processes. Potential tasks include the following: • Conduct a review of readily available tools currently used by state DOTs. • Select methods that are general enough to accommodate existing frameworks, including FHWA’s Vulnerability Assessment and Adaptation Framework (VAAF), RAMCAP, etc. • Develop tools that are GIS-based, quantitative, facilitate analysis at a point in time and as a function of time, are easy to use, and require minimal training. • Develop tools to capture historical and maintenance data for improving threat, vulnerability, and consequence models.

Research Problem Statements D-29 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS Recent scans of transportation agencies reveal the most common risk assessment tool is still the risk register. Risk registers are qualitative and thus do not support the decision-making necessary for prioritizing projects, investing, or changing project designs. During recent NCHRP workshops, transportation agencies have repeatedly expressed a need for tools for risk and resilience assessment. The need is urgent because of growing pressure from the public and government to take into consideration emerging threats such as climate change and extreme weather. The potential benefits include significant cost savings over the life cycle of a facility due to effective risk management founded on robust, quantitative risk and resilience assessments. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Implementation considerations include the staffing and training requirements to support risk and resilience assessments as well as technical issues related to integrating new tools into existing frameworks. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Staff with interest and experience in risk and resilience assessment, partnerships with consultancies and university research centers, peer exchanges with other DOTs, workshops, and agency-developed tools can support implementation. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $800,000 to $1,000,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 3) is approximately 50%. The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months. Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 3 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 6 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is pilot tested. 8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com, (571) 449-2064 Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253 Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128 9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.

D-30 Developing a Highway Framework to Conduct an All-Hazards Risk and Resilience Analysis • Develop metrics and communication strategies for reporting the results of resilience assessments for the purposes of planning, prioritization, screening, scoping, evaluation, etc. • Develop quantitative resilience assessment tools that facilitate analysis at a point of time and as a function of time, are easy to use, and require minimal training. • Develop strategies for integrating the outputs of asset management models and systems data availability and suitability for assessments. American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials Special Committee on Research and Innovation FY(TBD) NCHRP PROBLEM STATEMENT 1. PROBLEM TITLE (RPS C2) Identifying and Developing Analytical Tools to Conduct Resilience Assessments for Highway Assets 2. BACKGROUND INFORMATION AND NEED FOR RESEARCH Currently, there are no standardized tools and methods to undertake resilience assessments. This makes it difficult to assess the resilience of transportation infrastructure in a manner that can be communicated using standard sets of commonly adopted metrics. Tools that are proposed to be developed as part of this research will assess, report, and communicate the results of the assessment consistent with the resilience assessment methodologies developed in RPS B3. This research will build on the NCHRP Project 23-09 literature review on tools and technologies that are available in the state of practice to conduct resilience assessments. It will also build on the gap assessment that has been conducted to address the shortfalls of existing tools in developing/choosing a quantitative methodology for implementation that is consistent and easy to communicate to a range of audiences, including decision-makers and the public, as the basis for investing in resilience improvements and investments. 3. LITERATURE SEARCH SUMMARY Several studies on the topic of resilience have been conducted through the NCHRP Process. Below is a list of some of the more relevant NCHRP projects and products on quantitative methods of analysis for threats to asset condition and performance as well as those that provide guidance on how to incorporate such analyses into decision-making processes: • NCHRP Project 08-36/Task 146, “Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Planning and Assessment” • NCHRP Project 20-59(54), “Resilience Research Roadmap” • NCHRP Research Report 970: Mainstreaming System Resilience Concepts into Transportation Agencies: A Guide • NCHRP Project 20-125, “Strategies for Incorporating Resilience into Transportation Networks” • NCHRP Project 08-129, “Incorporation of Resilience Effort into Transportation Planning” 4. RESEARCH OBJECTIVE The objective of this research is to identify and develop a set of practical and easy to use tools that will help implement resilience assessment methodologies at state DOTs. These tools will enable implementation of resilience methodologies developed during NCHRP Project 23-09 RPS B3, including scoping, assessment, evaluation, and the integration of the results into DOT’s business processes. These tools should build on and relate to the risk assessment tools developed from RPS C1 for consistency of application. Potential Tasks: • Conduct a scan of the current state of practice by DOTS to include resilience metrics and resilience assessment tools.

Research Problem Statements D-31 5. URGENCY AND POTENTIAL BENEFITS Recent scans of transportation agencies reveal that the most common risk assessment tool is still the risk register. Risk registers are qualitative and thus do not support the decision-making necessary for prioritizing projects, investing, or changing project designs. During recent NCHRP workshops, transportation agencies have repeatedly expressed a need for tools for risk and resilience assessment. The need is urgent because of growing pressure from the public and government to take into consideration emerging threats such as climate change and extreme weather. The potential benefits include significant cost savings over the life cycle of a facility due to effective resilience management founded on robust, quantitative risk and resilience assessments. 6. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS Implementation considerations include the staffing and training requirements to support risk and resilience assessments as well as technical issues related to integrating new tools into existing frameworks. What existing venues or processes could be used to support implementation? Staff with interest and experience in risk and resilience assessment, partnerships with consultancies and university research centers, peer exchanges with other DOTs, workshops, and agency-developed tools can support implementation. 7. RECOMMENDED RESEARCH FUNDING AND RESEARCH PERIOD The estimated total funds needed to accomplish the research objectives are roughly $500,000 to $600,000. The level of effort of this project compared with the total level of effort for this phase of the roadmap (Phase 3) is approximately 30%.    The timeframe to complete the research for this project is estimated to be 18 to 24 months.  Based on the proposed roadmap for this program, this RPS is part of the 2-year Phase 3 roadmap. This project is expected to begin on year 6 of the program after the Highway Risk and Resilience (R&R) Manual is pilot tested.  8. PROBLEM STATEMENT AUTHOR(s): For each author, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. Maria Pena, AEM, maria.pena@aemcorp.com, (571) 449-2064   Mara Campbell, Jacobs, mara.campbell@jacobs.com (573) 353-0253   Suseel Indrakanti, Cambridge Systematics, SIndrakanti@camsys.com (301) 347-9128   9. POTENTIAL PANEL MEMBERS: For each panel member, provide name, affiliation, email address, and phone. To be selected in the future by NCHRP 10. PERSON SUBMITTING THE PROBLEM STATEMENT: Name, affiliation, email address, and phone.