Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations, Volume 2: Assessment Process Manual (2016)

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.

24 C H A P T E R 4 4.1 Overview This manual is grounded with a “First You Plan” strategy to support an effective and coor- dinated assessment, coding, and marking process during emergency events. The goal of the planning and preparation phase is to anticipate and train for as many of the likely emergency scenarios as possible so that the needed response can be identified, planned, prepared for, and effectively coordinated with a minimum of crisis management. While specific guidance for all work necessary at this stage is not directly within the scope of this document, it is important to discuss relevant preparatory tasks and efforts that can provide the foundation for the emergency response procedure presented in this manual. During the pre-event planning and preparation, regional factors, interagency needs, and com- munication issues can be identified and addressed in a non-emergency environment. Proper planning can ensure that limited resources for data collection (including installation, training, and maintenance of equipment for inspection) are available and optimally allocated. Proper planning and relatively low-cost, pre-event mitigation, in most cases, will result in less costly emergency response and recovery in the long term. Insufficient preparation and neglect is obviously an unnecessary risk and can be more costly in the long run if an emergency response is conducted inefficiently. It can also lead to costly litigation. A proactive approach of mitigation prior to the event can often be less costly than a reactive approach of repairs after an emergency event, particularly when economic consequences of disruption to the highway network are considered. These mitigation efforts also have benefits in day-to-day use beyond emergency preparation. However, one should also note that allocating excessive resources to preparation at the expense of daily operations and safety needs can have worse consequences. Hence, each SHA should routinely assess its preparation state to determine whether it is adequate, insufficient, or excessive based on the frequency of emergency events, potential size of the events, and condition and number of structures likely to be affected. Planning and preparation is an ongoing effort. Each organization should frequently evalu- ate the status of its emergency preparation planning so that it can develop and implement the necessary corrective actions. The magnitude of effort of these evaluations will depend on the relative amount of risk in a locale. For example, in some areas, large hazardous events may be infrequent but still pose significant risk. In such locales, it can sometimes be difficult to gather the necessary public support for allocating resources in these locations since the public may not perceive the risk. In such cases, public outreach and education efforts through partnerships with state emergency response and hazard agencies (e.g., geology department) and universities may help break down these barriers. Planning and Preparation

Planning and Preparation 25 In the following sections, a number of resources will be identified that can aid in the planning and preparation for an emergency event. A number of key questions that should be asked during the planning stage are highlighted in Table 4-1. 4.2 Development of Emergency Operations Plans Emergency operations plans (EOPs) detail the scope of preparedness and emergency management activities that are required. SHAs will either have a stand-alone EOP or the agency’s plan will be an ele- ment of the state’s overall EOP. All levels of government—local, tribal, state, and federal—including Theme Question Development of Emergency Operations Plans • How do structural assessments fit into the overall emergency operations plan? • How does the process coordinate with the broader missions of the agency? Data Infrastructure and Asset Management • What data and software tools need to be readily accessible to coordinate an emergency response? • What is the current status of that data and its quality? • How often does that data need to be updated? • How can this information be collected more efficiently during bridge inspections and asset management inventories? Equipment and Resource Infrastructure • What resources are needed and what are available? • What resources should be dedicated to the emergency response and which should be shared with regular operations? • What is our agency’s maturity level with technology? Which technologies are appropriate and available for emergency response? How can we use these in our workflows? • How much should be invested in emergency response preparation from the annual budget? • How often are updates and upgrades needed? Emergency Event Planning • What emergency events are most likely to occur? • Which areas/structures are likely to be affected significantly because of the intensity of the event and the vulnerability/condition of the structure? • Which structures and highway routes are the most critical to assess to ensure a rapid recovery? Traffic Levels • Are highways, strategic routes, and primary distributors identified by attributes and functional classification? • Are traffic levels (i.e., annual average daily traffic data) collected? What-if Analysis • Have ShakeCast and ShakeMap scenarios been established? • Are other scenarios established for other emergency events? • Are relevant structure data provided to provide realistic scenarios? Preparation for PDARs • Are PDARs familiar with their routes? • What alternate routes are available in case highways are blocked? • What personnel are available to assist in emergency response? Training • What mechanisms are in place if staff needs to be borrowed? • What material should be presented in training? • How often should this training be conducted? • Who should be present? Communication, Coordination, and Preparation • Does the agency have established intra- and interagency communication strategies? • How often is agency contact information updated? Important Emergency Management References • Is the agency familiar with standards such as the Multiagency Coordination System, National Incident Management System, and National Infrastructure Protection Plan? • Is the emergency operations plan based on Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 101? • Is the agency familiar with Homeland Security Presidential Directive National Preparedness guidelines? Table 4-1. Questions for planning stages and preparation phases.

26 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual their division offices—prepare formal EOPs to establish authority, responsibilities, and procedures for how the organization will operate in response to a disaster or emergency event. The federal government has provided many tools to state and local agencies for developing EOPs; most notable is the Comprehensive Preparedness Guide (CPG) 101. The CPG 101 provides guidelines to help planners at all levels of government in their efforts to develop and maintain via- ble all-hazards, all-threats EOPs [Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 2010b]. FEMA recommends that teams responsible for developing EOPs use CPG 101 to guide their efforts. Based on the questionnaire results, 80% of SHAs have an emergency response plan (ERP) or an emergency preparedness plan (EPP) on file that is either comprehensive for most emergency events (60% of SHAs) or different for each event (20% of SHAs). These plans are action and task oriented, enabling agencies to respond to serious incidents regardless of their cause. States in seismic and flood-prone areas likely have more comprehensive plans dealing specifically with the post-disaster assessment of structures. States not frequently affected by natural emergency events are less likely to have comprehen- sive plans to deal with widespread damage. Nonetheless, EPPs are vital to prevention, protec- tion, response, and recovery from emergencies of all kinds. These plans are consistent with the National Incident Management System (NIMS) and provide hazard-type annexes that outline details about threat-specific responsibilities. It is important that the EOP seamlessly integrate the process of assessing, coding, and marking highway structures with the overall response operations of a transportation agency. Key Recommendations for Developing Emergency Operations Plans • Incorporate structural assessments into the current EOP. • Establish the coordination process with the broader missions of the agency. 4.3 Data Infrastructure and Asset Management This section will describe key components of data management that should be in place for effective response. These include, but are not limited to, geographic information system (GIS) infrastructure (software and hardware), structural inventory databases, road networks, and traf- fic information. NCHRP Report 748: Guidelines for the Use of Mobile Lidar in Transportation Applications provides guidelines for utilizing mobile lidar to acquire a variety of information to develop powerful GIS databases to support a wide range of transportation applications. All of these data should be linked in a geospatial context so that they can be quickly coordi- nated with information from the emergency event in order to determine likely vulnerability. A detailed database will not be generated overnight. It will require long-term persistence and contributions from various departments throughout the organization. Routine updates, edits, and use of the database will enable it to be applied more effectively during emergency situations and for people to have more confidence in it. Paths of data sharing should be identified and thoroughly tested. The following subsections discuss examples of critical data infrastructure. Access to the database information can be seamlessly provided through the use of quick- response (QR) codes that can be placed on structure identification placards. QR codes placed permanently on the structure ID placard can be used during routine inspections (e.g., NBIS) and also during emergency situations to readily access data for the structure. In addition, QR codes can be placed on documents that refer to the structure of interest (e.g., paper-based reports) for ease of access. QR codes enable rapid access to other documents and information, such as

Planning and Preparation 27 previous inspection reports, structural databases, and photographs. They can improve coordi- nation between agencies during routine inspection as well as emergency situations. When a QR code is not placed on the structure prior to an emergency event, the field engineer can create and place a QR code on the inspection placard. Asset management information and pavement management systems linked to structures are important elements in preparing for emergency response and decision making. One example of asset management data is Utah DOT’s U-Plan website, which is an interactive, collaborative mapping platform that integrates data from various divisions within the DOT (Utah DOT 2014b). The intent of this system is to enable users to rapidly visualize data, track asset performance, and strengthen transportation planning. With this type of asset management system, planning and preparation procedures for emergency events can be better informed. Such an approach for the development of transportation asset management plans is a requirement of the recent MAP-21 legislation. States must address pavements and bridges on the National Highway System in their risk-based manage- ment plan. They are encouraged to include all infrastructure assets within the highway right-of-way in their risk management plan as well. It is also now required that each state and federal agency provide element-level bridge inspection data for bridges on the National Highway System. 4.3.1 Geographic Information Systems GIS provides a framework to integrate multiple types of data through geospatial coordinates and linked attributes. Through development of organized and systematic databases, informa- tion can be rapidly queried, compared, and analyzed. As a result, the use of GIS has been widely popular for emergency response given its ability to provide critical information rapidly, while creating useful response maps based on spatial data and field analysis (Barich et al. 2013, FEMA 2013). While use of GIS for transportation activities has been popular, its usage for structural engineering has been somewhat limited (Olsen et al. 2013). Most state and/or federal agencies have produced various hazard maps to indicate the variability of expected damage across a state. These maps can be used for planning purposes to identify structures that are most vulnerable, create inspection routes, perform simulations, and determine anticipated needs. Examples of relevant geospatial data are listed in Table 4-2. Similar to GIS, Civil Integrated Management (FHWA et al. 2012) expands the concept of GIS and Building Information Modeling to contain detailed, three-dimensional models of struc- tures as well as their attributes (e.g., materials, dimensions, linked information from inspection reports). When such systems are in place prior to an event, it can provide PDARs and inspectors with important information on the structure’s history and previous inspection results. In emergency response, GIS can be used to quickly identify structures within a radius of an earthquake’s epicenter or a distance from a tornado’s path to narrow down these inspection lists and help establish priority. When ShakeMaps or similar products are available, the list can be further narrowed down by examining fragility-based damage estimation (e.g., through use of Hazus-MH). The prioritization can also be updated with incoming PDA reports; however, numerous updates should be avoided because they can confuse and delay inspection teams. 4.3.2 Structural Inventory Databases Development of structure inventory and maintenance databases that tie structures to their geo- spatial location, traffic levels, condition, and other pertinent information can help determine their vulnerability during emergency events as well as their relative priority compared to other struc- tures. To ensure rapid response and querying of the data, it is important to have an integrated database system. A primary national-level database that has been used frequently by the practice and research communities for bridge data references is the NBI database (FHWA 2015a). The SHAs hold the

28 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual responsibility for inspecting and reporting bridge condition data to the NBI database following the established coding and recording guidelines. To be most effective, each SHA should have a GIS-enabled version of the NBI that it can use to quickly perform spatial analysis. Similar databases should be developed for other important structures. Relevant NBI fields are listed in Table 4-3. These should be reviewed for prioritization and to inform the PDA and DDA processes (note that information at the prioritization stage is also useful for the PDA and DDA and information at the PDA stage is also helpful during the DDA stage). If possible, these fields should be readily available during emergency inspections. Such information can be helpful to PDARs and inspectors to determine which damage is the result of the emergency event and what damage already existed on the structure. However, during PDA and DDA, the inspector should primarily focus on the change in condition state of the elements that form the structure. Confirming inventory data is not necessary but can be provided if it does not impede the PDA progress. 4.3.3 Road Networks and Traffic Information Highway route topologies and traffic information would ideally be established in a GIS data- base to enable effective updates to inspection routes, when necessary, as well as to provide real- time feedback to inspectors on viable transportation routes. This information should be updated Data Source Description Applicable Emergency Events U.S. Geological Survey ShakeMap (USGS 2014d) Based on accelerometer data following an earthquake, the USGS can immediately create a map showing the distribution of earthquake intensity (modified Mercalli intensity). When such data are integrated in a GIS with information regarding the location of structures, an agency can quickly identify which structures are most likely to be damaged. In some cases, predictive maps have been created to show areas where damage is likely. Earthquake FEMA Flood Maps (FEMA 2014) FEMA flood maps provide detailed delineations of where water levels would be expected to reach during various probabilistic storm events. While the primary intent of these maps is for insurance loss estimation, they can be useful to plan and identify structures that would be most vulnerable. Maps are continually updated based on improved elevation data (e.g., lidar), storm and flood modeling and analysis techniques, and human modifications. Flooding, storm surge. Although not the focus, may have some usefulness for tsunamis. Digital Topographic Maps (USGS 2006) National Elevation Dataset. Elevation data can be useful for many hazards to identify areas that are most susceptible. Additionally, when a high-quality digital elevation model exists prior to an event and data are collected quickly after, deformation analysis can be conducted to determine locales that suffered the most extreme impacts. Earthquakes, tsunamis, hurricanes, flooding, snow, etc. Municipal Parcel Maps Most counties have these. They are useful to quickly identify owners (including contact information) of properties that may be affected by damages to structures. Or they may be needed for access permission in order for a site investigation to be conducted. All Hazus (FEMA 2015) Hazus is a national standard methodology for determining losses for various disasters. It can be useful for planning purposes. Many data layers are available within the Hazus framework. All Table 4-2. Examples of relevant geospatial data (often available through online viewers, Google® EarthTM, and GIS data layers).

Planning and Preparation 29 frequently with information such as road closures due to construction. Online mapping services such as Google Maps could be used as a fallback for those who do not have GIS software. It is also important to consider traffic volumes when determining critical structures within the transportation network. This information can be used to make informed decisions about estab- lishing alternative routes in the event of closure of a damaged structure. For highly critical struc- tures, one can perform simulations and scenario planning prior to the event. The information is also useful in deciding which structures to allocate resources for retrofit in an effort to mitigate the effects of the emergency event. Further, such information can be of use when deciding whether a structure should be closed since a high-traffic structure that is weakened can be further damaged by heavy traffic volumes while a low-volume structure may be treated differently. 4.3.4 Data Inconsistencies Inconsistencies within various databases (e.g., NBI and state-owned systems) may exist. These inconsistencies could mislead the emergency response team and delay structural assessments and evaluations. Therefore, it is necessary to cross-validate the information across multiple sources to resolve any inconsistencies prior to the event. All applicable databases should be compiled and cross-referenced in order to ensure an efficient response. Key Recommendations for Data Infrastructure and Asset Management • Place QR codes on structures at the earliest convenience (e.g., routine inspections or site visits). • Identify what data, software, and hardware are needed to coordinate an emergency response. • Identify the current status and quality of data infrastructure—improve if needed. • Establish a timeline for updating data infrastructure (e.g., 24-month interval). • Provide recommendations on improving data collection during bridge inspection and asset management inventories. • Cross-reference structure databases and resolve inconsistencies. Prioritization PDA DDA 5B: Route Signing Prefix 5C: Designated Level of Service 6: Features Intersected 7: Facility Carried by Structure 9: Location 19: Bypass, Detour Length 27: Year Built 28: Lanes on and under the Structure 29: Average Daily Traffic 42: Type of Service 8: Structure Number 9: Location 16: Latitude 17: Longitude 27: Year Built 28: Lanes On and Under the Structure 43: Structure Type, Main 44: Structure Type, Approach Spans 45: Number of Spans in Main Unit 46: Number of Approach Spans 49: Structure Length 58: Deck Condition Rating 59: Superstructure Condition Rating 60: Substructure Condition Rating 61: Channel and Channel Protection Condition Rating 62: Culvert Condition Rating 71: Waterway Adequacy 113: Scour Critical Bridge 21: Maintenance Responsibility 31: Design Load 32: Approach Roadway Width 64: Operating Rating 66: Inventory Rating 92: Critical Feature Inspection 107: Deck Structure Type 113: Scour Critical Bridge Source: FHWA (2015a). Table 4-3. NBI fields recommended during assessment stages.

30 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual 4.4 Equipment and Resource Infrastructure During planning, an agency should identify the resources needed during an emergency event and ensure that they are available when and where needed. Inexpensive tools should be prepack- aged (see Section 8.3.1 for details) and put together in kits that a PDAR can quickly access. All personnel should be aware that emergency response has the highest priority for resources such as vehicles. Items that are not specifically used for emergency response should be well-maintained, routinely inspected, and fully charged. Additional resources could include bailey bridges, wood for temporary bracing, gas, and charged batteries. Key Recommendations for Equipment and Resource Infrastructure • Establish a list of resources needed for emergency response. • Identify which resources typically used for regular operations are needed for emergency response. • Determine appropriate technologies and workflows that can be used for emergency response. • Establish an appropriate percentage of agency funding resources to be put toward emergency response preparation. • Identify what upgrades are needed for tablet software and databases and how often they should be updated. 4.5 Emergency Event Planning Emergency event planning for highway structures is a detailed and comprehensive process. Figure 4-1 provides a simplified flowchart for SHAs to categorize the inspection of structures following an emergency event. This flowchart considers the emergency event type, priority inspection lists, lifeline routes, and structure vulnerability. It is recommended that each agency establish its own version of this event plan. 4.5.1 Identify Emergency Events Each SHA should first identify the emergency events that are most likely to affect its state and plan accordingly. Chapter 2 in this manual describes common emergency events and their likely impacts. Mitigation efforts should consider the type, frequency, and extent of the event in order to prioritize the response planning. 4.5.2 Develop Priority Lists/Routes Each SHA should develop a prioritized list of structures that need to be inspected in order to minimize disruption to the transportation network and ensure that the traveling public can safely travel. This could be done at the district/regional level. In some states, it may make sense to utilize existing routes for maintenance such as snow removal. 4.5.2.1 Identification of Lifeline or Priority Routes Lifeline routes are critical links in the highway system that connect important infrastructure such as utilities, hospitals, and schools. It is critical that these routes be serviceable as they are needed to provide essential services during the first 72 hours following an emergency event.

Planning and Preparation 31 Figure 4-1. Event planning flowchart.

32 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual Based on a report conducted by Oregon DOT, the three main goals identified for Oregon seismic lifelines routes are as follows (CH2M Hill 2012): 1. Support survivability and emergency response efforts immediately following an emergency event. 2. Provide transportation facilities that are critical to life support functions for an interim period following an emergency event. 3. Support statewide economic recovery. These three goals help identify high-priority routes that will be heavily used immediately after an event as well as long-term during economic recovery. These routes typically will have high traffic volumes and provide access to critical facilities such as hospitals, fire stations, airports, and emergency response staging areas. They also serve as evacuation routes when necessary. These routes should be identified prior to the event and plans made to give them top priority during the response effort. Once identified, these structures can be prioritized for retrofit or strengthening during the preparation phase. Each highway and major structure in the network should be prioritized based on its importance to the transportation network as well as for use in post-event recovery operations. Table 4-4 presents priority levels for routes based on systems developed by Utah DOT, NYSDOT, and Oregon DOT to identify lifeline-critical routes. 4.5.2.2 Prioritization of Structures Once lifeline routes are established, critical structures on or above those routes can be identified. Structures such as high-traffic bridges and tunnels classified as critical should be marked as high priority for DDA. Essential structures should be marked as high priority for PDA. NYSDOT presents a detailed process for prioritizing these structures for detailed assess- ments; however, a similar process can be used for the PDA stage (see Table 4-5). Once these structures are identified, the amount of resources required can be estimated based on each of the response levels. Response for structures identified as highly critical should be discussed regularly with vari- ous stakeholders who may need to utilize that structure for their response tasks or transport in emergency situations. However, for ordinary structures, a scoring system can help with the prioritization. The following are two example prioritization scoring systems: • NYSDOT developed a computer application to use in Microsoft® Access™ for determining structural prioritization (O’Connor 2010). • WSDOT has developed a methodology for calculating a priority index for each structure: An Emergency Response Plan for Bridge Management (Reed and Wang 1993). This plan also con- tains tables showing the number of bridges and number of team leaders needed. When an event occurs, the managing engineer should update the prioritization lists based on the best available information. Priority Level Description 1 Lifeline routes, Interstates, the Strategic Highway Network, and Congressional High Priority Corridors 2 Other principal arterials 3 All other roadways beginning with those that can handle increased emergency services due to hospitals, fire stations, river/stream crossings, etc. Source: Modified from Oregon DOT (2014) and Utah DOT (2014b). Table 4-4. Route priority levels.

Planning and Preparation 33 Feature Considerations Initial information Initial reports from Fast Reconnaissance including the media or the general public will help narrow down where damage is most intense and which structures have experienced major damage or collapse. Structural vulnerability This includes the year the structure was built and design criteria. Structural characteristics that increase the likelihood of failure from an earthquake (and other hazards) include superstructure discontinuities (simply supported spans instead of a superstructure with continuity), skew angle, bearing type and height, lack of lateral bracing, deteriorated condition (as reflected in the condition ratings especially the primary and secondary structural members), seat length and width, lack of restraint from lateral displacement, vulnerable structure type (e.g., trusses), redundancy, poor seismic detailing of concrete reinforcement, etc. Anticipated mode of failure In planning analyses, one can identify likely modes of failure for critical structures and assess their impacts to determine how catastrophic the failure of that structure would be. Geological conditions Structures close to rivers and in other areas with granular soil and high water tables can be damaged from liquefaction including settlements and lateral spreading. Structures close to unstable slopes or near active landslides should also be given high priority. In the case of flooding, sites with expansive or collapsible soils can also lead to higher levels of damage. Condition Any structure will deteriorate with time due to exposure to elements and fatigue from repeat loading, degrading structural capacity. Structures that are operating well beyond their design life could also be more vulnerable. However, repairs and modifications could also have been made. Note that these ratings and databases can often change regularly since deficient structures will likely be placed in high priority for repairs. The Recording and Coding Guide for Bridges denotes fields 58–60 as condition ratings for deck, superstructure, and substructure, respectively (FHWA 1995). Elements In addition to the overall structure condition, some elements may be in poor condition and could be the weak link with the additional loading from an emergency event. Traffic levels Structures with higher traffic levels normally should be given higher priority. The traffic level can be measured by the annual average daily traffic. Highways with links to critical infrastructure (hospitals, fire stations, etc.) should be given higher priority. Detour availability and impacts of road closures How does this structure fit in with the network? Structures on routes with few or long detour options available should be given higher priority. Structure use In addition to carrying traffic loads, some structures will also support vital utilities such as power lines and pipelines. These structures should be given higher priority. Additionally, some structures may be important for utility access. Construction Projects Both current and near-future construction projects should be considered in the prioritization since they will affect the traffic network. *These considerations are not all-inclusive and are meant as a starting point. Source: Modified from O’Connor (2010). Table 4-5. List of features or information sources that can be used to prioritize structures for PDA.* 4.5.2.3 Fragility-Based Earthquake Damage Rating for Bridge Structures For earthquake planning and response, two main software tools have been developed: REDARS by the California DOT (Caltrans) and ShakeCast by USGS. These tools can be used to find most vulner- able bridges and roadway segments. These tools make use of fragility curves, which estimate the prob- ability that a structure will meet or exceed a particular level of damage, particularly for bridges during an extreme event. Several SHAs have already developed these fragility curves, especially for earth- quake loading. Other SHAs may need to develop these for incorporation in local design practices. Hazus-MH also provides procedures that examine bridge and tunnel vulnerabilities in the event of a seismic, tsunami, or flooding event (for bridges only) (FEMA 2010a; FEMA 2009). A GIS database of bridges and tunnels is also provided by Hazus-MH for SHAs that do not have their own system.

34 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual 4.5.3 Traffic Levels and Capacity When prioritizing routes for PDA of highway structures, traffic levels and capacity need to be considered to ensure that the highway network remains as efficient as possible for orderly evacuation, transport of supplies, and quick return to day-to-day activities for a healthy econ- omy. The following measures related to traffic levels have been used for different assessment purposes: highway functional classification, capacity, congestion, emergency access route, and interdependent lifelines. The traffic level represents the amount of traffic that a highway facility carries on a normal day. There are different performance measures to capture the ranges of traffic levels such as ADT and AADT, the unit of these measures is typically expressed as vehicles per day. Considering the other criteria mentioned in the previous section and the facility types, ADT and AADT are the most-used measurements to address traffic stress levels on the facility. This information is read- ily available on all major roads for most transportation agencies since it is critical to a variety of transportation engineering activities. In many cases, these data are presented as AADT traffic flow maps where information is collected via automatic traffic recording systems by state DOTs. These automated systems can also help throughout the assessing, coding, and marking process in a variety of ways. First, they can be monitored after the event to determine which highways have additional capacity to direct traffic to and which are overloaded. They can be useful to adjust PDA prioritizations once bottlenecks have been identified. They can also help route PDARs between structures more efficiently. In addition to AADT, another criterion to consider is the percentage of heavy vehicles in the general traffic composition; however, such information may not be as readily available. For general purposes like highway inspections and assessment, agencies can categorize high- way structures based on their estimated AADT level as follows (Rotherham Metropolitan Borough Council 2014): • Traffic Level 1: greater than 80,000 vehicles/day (high) • Traffic Level 2: 50,000 to 80,000 vehicles/day (moderately high) • Traffic Level 3: 20,000 to 50,000 vehicles/day (medium) • Traffic Level 4: less than 20,000 vehicles/day (low) As an example of a more complex system, Table 4-6 shows the categories recommended by Oregon DOT to analyze their highway facilities. For additional examples of traffic level integration, refer to Appendix C. Levels AADT Range Color 1 0 1,000 2 1,001 2,500 3 2,501 5,000 4 5,001 10,000 5 10,001 15,000 6 15,001 20,000 7 20,001 30,000 8 30,001 50,000 9 50,001 75,000 10 75,001 + Source: Oregon DOT (2015). Table 4-6. Example AADT traffic levels.

Planning and Preparation 35 Key Recommendations for Emergency Event Planning • Establish a list of possible emergency events. • Correlate which areas and highway structures are likely to be affected during specific emergency events. • Identify critical highway routes and establish lifeline routes. • Identify highways based on their attributes and functional classification. • Identify traffic levels such as ADT and AADT. 4.6 What-if Analyses Agencies such as USGS and NOAA have produced tools for predicting intensities of emer- gency events throughout the United States. This information can be useful in performing what-if analyses and identifying vulnerable structures. These what-if-analyses should consider the maxi- mum credible events as well as more frequent, but lower intensity events. This scenario event planning can be useful to identify lifeline routes as well as more specific vulnerable sections of highway and structures for route prioritization. The following examples are provided by USGS and are for earthquake events. Although these are only for earthquakes, they provide a general outline on procedures and tools that are useful for emergency response what-if analyses. ShakeMap and ShakeCast, potential tools that can be used for this analysis, can be used both in the pre-planning process as well as the post-event response process: • ShakeMap (Figure 4-2) provides near-real-time maps of ground motions and shaking inten- sity after a significant earthquake (USGS 2014d). This information combines readings from seismographs, and crowdsourcing. In areas with high seismicity, historic maps can be used for planning purposes. In other areas, scenario maps can be created considering likely ground motions, source parameters, and geologic setting. • ShakeCast (Figure 4-3) is a tool for automating ShakeMap delivery to important users as well as identifying individual structures that have experienced high levels of shaking (USGS 2014c). This output is typically received within 10 minutes. It includes a map showing areas with strong ground motions as well as a list of structures that could have been damaged. The list is not all inclusive but, rather, an initial estimate of potentially damaged structures that should be verified by field assessments. Prior to an event, the following steps [modified from Utah DOT (2014a) and Wald et al. (2008)] should be completed by each agency: • Support the USGS in developing ground motion models and test earthquakes for production of scenario maps • Import relevant bridge data (e.g., NBI, fragility curves) into ShakeCast including – Year built [NBI field 27] – Angle of skew [NBI field 34] – Bridge type (kind of material, type of design and/or construction) [NBI field 43] – Number of spans [NBI field 45] – Maximum span length [NBI field 48] – Total bridge length [NBI field 49] – Bridge width [NBI field 52] • Create an email notification list • Evaluate scenario ShakeMaps to test ShakeCast • Identify probable associated bridge damage and structures that are highly vulnerable

Source: USGS (2014d). Figure 4-2. ShakeMap of M6.0 earthquake in California on August 24, 2014. Source: USGS (2014c). Figure 4-3. Sample ShakeCast output.

Planning and Preparation 37 These products produce an estimate of ground shaking intensity only. Researchers (Zhu et al. 2014) are working on tools that will enable cascading hazards such as liquefaction, lateral spreading, settlement, and landslides that can be incorporated into the ShakeCast engine. After the event, the SHA can modify their inspection routes based on the output from ShakeCast. Key Recommendations for What-if Analyses • Establish ShakeMap and ShakeCast scenarios for bridges during earthquakes. • When applicable, establish scenarios for other emergency events. • Update relevant structure data to provide more accurate scenarios. 4.7 Preparation for PDA Responders Several preparatory steps [modified from Arkansas DOT (2008)] can help an inspector be ready for emergency response: • Driving inspection routes regularly (annually) • Visiting reporting stations or local offices (annually) • Identifying alternative driving routes • Familiarizing oneself with major river crossings (annually) • Periodically verifying supplies (e.g., quarterly) • Keeping up-to-date maps Key Recommendations for Preparation for PDA Responders • Familiarize PDARs with their routes. • Identify alternative PDAR routes. • Establish a list of personnel that can be used for emergency response. 4.8 Training These procedures and methodologies will only be as valuable as the people who are imple- menting them. One of the keys to the success of these efforts is frequent and effective training, which will ensure that the procedures can be implemented quickly and remain applicable over time by all agencies involved in emergency response. This section provides recommendations for different types of training and intervals that need to be considered when developing an effective training program. This training should be attended by key personnel as well as backup personnel. In addition, a variety of training materials are avail- able on the TRB website (www.trb.org) to supplement information presented in this manual and in Volume 3: Coding and Marking Guidelines. Attendance by personnel from local, state, and federal agencies can also be effective in helping improve coordination. Additional training resources are provided in NCHRP Synthesis of Highway Practice 468: Inter- active Training for All-Hazards Emergency Planning, Preparation, and Response for Maintenance

38 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual and Operations Field Personnel. Although the training materials developed as part of this research that focused on structures are much narrower in scope, it is recommended that they be imple- mented in a framework consistent with those recommendations in NCHRP Synthesis 468. 4.8.1 Formal Training Formal training processes (and potentially certification) are important to ensure that every- one is aware of the overall program and understands their role in emergency response. The fol- lowing types of training are recommended: • General training for all relevant employees who will interface with PDARs in some capacity (e.g., GIS, IT, or logistics staff). This could include personnel from other agencies, as needed. This training provides a high-level overview of the process so that they are informed as to what the PDARs will be doing and how to best assist them. • Basic PDAR training for personnel designated to perform PDAs (e.g., maintenance and opera- tions personnel, design engineers). This training covers how to perform PDA evaluations as well as how to transition the results of the PDA stage to the DDA stage. The training includes more specific information on how to use the assessment flowcharts, provides illustrative case study examples, presents the coding and marking procedures, and describes integration of the PDA process into the DDA stage. This training can be conducted as annual offerings of detailed (e.g., full-day) workshops for new employees as well as one-hour refresher courses attended annually. Note that refresher courses could be offered quarterly to encourage and better accommodate participation. These refresher courses can help reinforce the concepts of the PDA process as well as types of damages that can occur. It also helps the PDARs be better prepared mentally for a potential event. • Specialized training modules for managing engineers, EMCs, emergency data coordinators, chief engineers, DDA inspectors, and EI inspectors to be performed frequently (yearly). This training provides an overview of all stages in emergency response with a focus on both the preparation and FR stages. Examples are provided to help show the prioritization process as well as how to improve interdepartment and interagency coordination. When basic and/or advanced technologies are planned to be used in damage assessments, it is important that the PDARs and inspectors are fully versed in how to use that technology to complete their jobs. Ideally, they would regularly use that technology in their day-to-day duties. However, in the event that they do not regularly use the technology, periodic refreshers may be necessary to make sure that they are able to collect the appropriate data. 4.8.2 Mock Scenarios Mock events and ground-truthing exercises are an effective approach to test response proce- dures and provide PDARs and inspectors with field experience under non-threatening conditions. For example, California and other states have completed ShakeOut earthquake drills (e.g., http:// www.shakeout.org/california/) to help prepare for response to earthquakes. During these events, inspection teams can become familiar with their route and structures, verify that inspection routes are effective, identify potential hazards, identify potential solutions, and overall become more pre- pared and comfortable with their roles and duties. Further, communication and coordination procedures can be tested to verify that the response is carried out in an organized, effective manner. Following the mock scenarios, leadership should meet to discuss the results so that they can identify solutions and have them in place before the next emergency event. Budget and logistics should be considered when determining the frequency and scope of these events. They are recommended to be conducted at a minimum of every 5 years. However, several state agencies have already integrated these events into their standard practice, conducting “ShakeOuts” once a year.

Planning and Preparation 39 4.8.3 Implementation of the Assessment Process and Integration with Routine Inspections The assessment process following emergency events will be more effective if it is integrated with routine inspections (e.g., NBIS). As such, pertinent structural data and photographs should be collected during routine inspections and made available to the PDARs for emergency events. 4.8.4 Training Immediately After Event Once an emergency event has occurred and PDAR teams have been assembled, a quick refresher course (approximately one-half hour in length) should be given prior to sending the teams out in the field. This course should not elaborate on details but should cover the most critical components of data collection and overall status of the emergency response, and provide PDARs with any pertinent event-specific information. A quick refresher module is available with the other training materials developed as part of this research. Key Recommendations for Training • Review training information in NCHRP Synthesis 468. • Identify procedures needed to obtain additional staff. • Prepare appropriate training materials. • Determine an appropriate amount of time that should be dedicated to training materials. • Provide a list of personnel needed during training. 4.9 Communication, Coordination, and Preparation Intra- and interagency coordination and communication strategies need to be established during planning for effective response. These procedures will be discussed in more detail in Chapter 7. SHAs and other agencies have diverse organizational structures and it is important to consider these when developing an ERP. Contact information should be updated frequently, preferably as a live database/document on a network accessible to everyone. Key Recommendations for Communication, Coordination, and Preparation • Establish intra- and interagency communication protocols and strategies. • Update contact information regularly. 4.10 Important Emergency Management References The following is a list of other documents that deal with emergency management and/or response that are useful in preparing and improving ERPs: • Multiagency Coordination System (MACS)—The MACS is a process that allows all levels of government and disciplines to work together [Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 2008]. The MACS is detailed in the NIMS on pages 64–69.

40 Assessing, Coding, and Marking of Highway Structures in Emergency Situations: Assessment Process Manual • National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP)—The NIPP provides a coordinated approach to established national priorities, goals, and requirements for critical infrastructure and key resources protection (DHS 2013a). • National Preparedness Guidelines—The purposes of these guidelines are to organize and syn- chronize national efforts to strengthen national preparedness, guide national investments in national preparedness, incorporate lessons from past emergency events, facilitate a capability- based and risk-based investment planning process, and establish readiness metrics to measure progress (DHS 2007). • Comprehensive Preparedness Guide 201: Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Guide (CPG 201)—CPG 201 describes a four-step process for developing a threat and hazard identification and risk assessment (THIRA) and provides communities with additional guid- ance for conducting one (DHS 2013b). • NCHRP Report 525: Surface Transportation Security, Volume 6: Guide for Emergency Transpor- tation Operations—This guide supports development of a formal program for the improved management of traffic incidents, natural disasters, security events, and other emergencies on the highway system (Lockwood et al. 2005). • Presidential Policy Directive (PPD) 8: National Preparedness (issued March 30, 2011; replaced Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 issued December 17, 2003)—This document describes the way federal departments and agencies will prepare for an incident. It requires the DHS to coordinate with other federal departments and agencies and with state, tribal, and local governments to develop a National Preparedness Goal (DHS 2011). Key Recommendations for Important Emergency Management References • Familiarize yourself and other appropriate individuals with national standards. • Review all applicable references. • Familiarize the agency with PPD National Preparedness guidelines.