Guide for Emergency Transportation Operations (2005) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 47-56
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 47... ...
APPENDIX: THE STATE OF THE PRACTICE OPERATIONS -- STATE OF THE PRACTICE The actual field activities in response to incidents or other emergencies take place within traditional frameworks designed for generic incidents and emergencies. Emergency response, general incident management, and TIM all have their own conventions consisting of agency roles, accepted procedures, headquarters functions, and ad hoc reactions by field personnel.
|
From page 48... ...
Most state DOTs have a basic incident management response program for traffic control and alternate routing, either for major incidents or upon request to support the public safety community. TIM procedures in the field are developed by each agency and are sometimes referenced in national publications developed by agencies or organizations such as FHWA, the USDOT, the International Association of Chiefs of Police (IACP)
|
From page 49... ...
29 Have quick clearance policies? 36 Train all responders in traffic control procedures?
|
From page 50... ...
In addition, workshops by the American Association of State Highway Transportation Officials and FHWA have looked at state DOT roles regarding terrorist events. Homeland security exercises such as the Top Officials (TOPOFF)
|
From page 51... ...
TECHNOLOGY -- STATE OF THE PRACTICE At present, the applications of technology to ETO are limited and based principally on standard ITS surveillance, detection, and communications systems. These systems are operated from state DOT TMCs and public safety call and CAD centers.
|
From page 52... ...
The potential of DOT surveillance and communications systems as part of a more comprehensive approach to incident and emergency operations is only gradually being understood. As indicated in the 2003 FHWA "Traffic Incident Management Self-Assessment National Report," some ITS technology has long been applied by state DOTs in most major metropolitan areas and, despite partial deployment, is being utilized for incident detection, verification, and public information.
|
From page 53... ...
Overall, there is an enormous dedication to public safety (especially responder safety and property preservation) and secondarily to public convenience.
|
From page 54... ...
DOT responders are an important source of the mobilization process by virtue of direct face-to-face communications with responders and by their link to CAD and TMCs. DOT field presence at incidents is often a reflection of requests by public safety agencies in response to the need for major traffic control, as well as debris removal and facility repair, unless the DOT has a proactive TIM and motorist assist program.
|
From page 55... ...
Institutional Strengths As indicated in the FHWA "Traffic Incident Management Self-Assessment National Report," institutionalization of ETO is in its early stages. DOTs are forging better working relationships among DOT and public safety personnel, but there is a long way to go in the establishment of formal programs within and among agencies.
|
From page 56... ...
Actual response procedures for system restoration often are left to ad hoc responses in the field. Despite the obvious overlap in responsibilities, personnel, infrastructure, and equipment appropriate to ETO, there is only a modest attempt to exploit common needs and resources or to develop common protocols covering traffic and other emergencies both among state DOTs and between DOTs and their public safety counterparts.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.