A Pre-Event Recovery Planning Guide for Transportation (2013)

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.

3 Recovery after a catastrophic event is a complex and challenging process. It involves addressing complicated questions about whether, and in what way, to repair or replace damaged infrastructure. It brings together people and organizations that may not usually work together in day-to-day operations or non-emergency situations. Recovery is dependent upon a range of factors that both precede and follow the actual catastrophic event. There is little time to resolve the tension between achieving fast results and making needed improvements. The pressures of getting “up and running” and “back to normal” are intense in a post-disaster situation. Usually a gradual process (depending on the type and extent of damage done), recovery can continue for months or even years after the event, from the initial restoration of some level of operations through the longer term reconstruction of critical infrastructure. Although recovery is a critical step in the emergency response cycle, it is one of the least under stood aspects of emergency management. Many state departments of transportation (DOTs) and public transportation agencies have emergency response plans that address immediate operational situations, e.g., Continuity of Operations Plans (COOPs). Few, however, have emergency recovery plans prepared in advance. Most often, planning for recovery happens only after a disaster occurs. As noted by the Federal Emer- gency Management Agency (FEMA) in standard materials prepared for emergency management training, “Although planning is an action that is conducted in all four of the primary emergency management functions (preparedness, response, recovery, and mitigation), it is more commonly associated with preparedness and mitigation prior to the event” (FEMA Emergency Management Institute). Preparing for recovery before an event can speed recovery after an event. For instance, in 2007, when a gasoline tanker accidentally crashed on the Mac- Arthur Maze in Oakland, California, one of the busiest freeway interchange systems in the United States, two key highway connectors on heavily traveled Interstate 80 near the San Francisco Bay Bridge collapsed in a gasoline fire. The local media projected that the connectors would be down from 5 months to a year and that traffic in the East Bay would be gridlocked indefinitely. Instead, 26 days after the incident, the rebuilt connectors for the Maze were reopened to traffic. Having emergency expedited contracting and procurement processes in place along with a list of pre-approved contractors allowed Caltrans to signifi- cantly reduce the time required to repair the damaged MacArthur Maze. Within C h a p t e r 1 Introduction FEMA Definition of Recovery “Full restoration of operability” that includes ➢   Development, coordination, and execution of service- and site- restoration plans. ➢   Reconstitution of government operations and services. ➢   Additional measures for social, political, environmental, and economic restoration. ➢   Evaluation of the incident to identify lessons learned. ➢  Post-incident reporting. ➢   Development of initiatives to mitigate the effects of future incidents. Source: Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101: Producing Emergency Plans—A Guide for All-Hazard Emergency Operations Planning for State, Territorial, Tribal, and Local Governments. Interim Version 1.0 (FEMA 2008).

4 a pre-event recovery planning Guide for transportation days of the governor’s invocation of emergency procedures on the day of the incident, several contractors were brought on the job. Usually, this process takes months. Bids for the rebuilding project were advertised on a Thursday and the contractor was selected by the following Monday. In another example, in 2002, a barge veered several hundred feet off course and struck the Interstate 40 Bridge crossing the Arkansas River in Webbers Falls, Oklahoma. The collision caused the bridge, part of a major east-west transportation corridor, to plunge into the river. Sixty-five days after the accident, the bridge reopened to traffic. The I-40 Bridge in Oklahoma is located in an area of both farmland and forest, where some land was owned by the Cherokee Nation and some was owned by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) but managed as a wildlife refuge by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Although the bridge was being replaced at its original location, reconstruction required creating a riverside staging area and actual construction in the river channel. The Oklahoma Department of Transportation’s (ODOT’s) strong pre-existing relationships with the state and federal agencies involved enabled the use of informal emergency procedures to expedite the recovery. For example, because obtaining a required Section 404 permit from USACE can be a lengthy process, ODOT was allowed to apply for the permit after the construction was complete. Along with repair and reconstruction, recovery can create the opportunity to “build back better.” When the I-35 Bridge in Minneapolis, Minnesota, suddenly collapsed into the Mississippi River (2007), the NTSB investigation found that a flaw in the initial design contributed to the collapse. The construction of the new I-35 Bridge allowed the Minnesota Department of Transportation (MnDOT) to incorporate improvements that addressed the “black ice” problem that had fre- quently occurred on the old bridge. The new I-35 Bridge has the world’s largest anti-icing system and uses smart bridge technology to generate a record of how the bridge manages the stresses of traffic. Moreover, the new bridge opened to traffic on Thursday, September 18, 2008, more than 3 months ahead of schedule. Recovery is typically considered to be a series of discrete efforts that take place after an event or disaster and is often considered in phases: an emergency/response recovery period, short-term recovery, and long-term recovery/reconstruction, as illustrated in Figure 1. • During the emergency/response recovery period (typically 1 to 7 days after the event), damage assessments are made; debris clean-up/removal starts; emergency, often short-term, repair of transportation systems occurs; and interim transportation services are provided, if necessary. • During the short-term recovery period, emergency demolitions occur and temporary structures and infrastructure may be put in place to replace damaged infrastructure. • Long-term recovery (typically several years) consists of the permanent reconstruction and restoration of the transportation system infrastructure. Depending on the severity of the event, disaster declarations and federal assistance may be involved. It has been noted that the restoration of transportation infrastructure involves a con- tinuous process of assessment, prioritization, mitigation, and repair. As more specific information becomes available about the extent of damage and requirements for repairs, priorities may be adjusted and short- and long-term strategies may be revised. The National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) considers recovery as a process that begins prior to an event and continues afterwards, as illustrated in Figure 2. As the examples of recovery in California, Oklahoma, and Minnesota show, the speed and success of recovery can be greatly enhanced by establishing processes and relationships before an event occurs. Preparing for recovery prior to a disaster—pre-event recovery planning—reduces the problems of trying to locate required capabilities and create policies when scrambling to

Introduction 5 manage immediate recovery. Recovery efforts are executed more efficiently when resources are pre-positioned, contractors have been pre-approved, and alternate facilities are already identified. In addition, recovery can begin quickly without the need to wait until recovery plans are developed after the disaster. The Government Accountability Office, in the report Catastrophic Disasters: Enhanced Leadership, Capabilities, and Accountability Controls Will Improve the Effectiveness of the Nation’s Preparedness, Response, and Recovery System (2006), found that preparing for and recovering from any cata- strophic incident involves three basic elements: leadership, capabilities, and accountability. Other researchers have found similar key elements that impact the effectiveness of a recovery process: leadership, ability to act, and knowledge of what to do (see Figure 3). As noted in an overview of The Recovery Phase of Emergency Management (Baird 2010) prepared for the Intermodal Freight Transportation Institute: From a transportation perspective, many aspects of “emergency management” and “homeland security” have received the attention of governmental agencies and transportation researchers, but recovery is seldom mentioned. Significant initiatives have been undertaken to improve security of the transporta- tion infrastructure and security for passengers and cargo . . . Transportation and public works agencies Source: Adapted from the National Disaster Recovery Framework (FEMA/DHS 2011). Figure 1. Traditional recovery phases. Source: Adapted from the NDRF (FEMA/DHS 2011). Figure 2. Recovery as a process.

6 a pre-event recovery planning Guide for transportation have become more active participants in emergency drills and exercises. Public agencies are letting their stakeholders know about improvements in mitigation, preparedness, and response, but searches of publications and websites did not identify a single initiative among public agencies focused exclusively on recovery. (27–28) NCHRP Report 753: A Pre-Event Recovery Planning Guide for Transportation is created to provide an overview of what can be done to prepare for the recovery of transportation critical infrastructure. Principles and processes based on federal guidance, effective practices, and observations based on case studies are provided to guide transportation owners and operators in their efforts to plan for recovery prior to the occurrence of an event that impacts transporta- tion systems. Tools and resources are included to assist in both pre-planning for recovery and implementing recovery after an event. Source: Adapted from Rubin, Saperstein, and Barbee 1985. Figure 3. Elements of recovery process.