AASHTO PAR-2005 Protecting America s Roads Bridges and Tunnels The Role of State DOTs in Homeland Security《保护美国的道路、桥梁和隧道 国土安全中州交通部的作用.修改件1》.pdf

《AASHTO PAR-2005 Protecting America s Roads Bridges and Tunnels The Role of State DOTs in Homeland Security《保护美国的道路、桥梁和隧道 国土安全中州交通部的作用.修改件1》.pdf》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《AASHTO PAR-2005 Protecting America s Roads Bridges and Tunnels The Role of State DOTs in Homeland Security《保护美国的道路、桥梁和隧道 国土安全中州交通部的作用.修改件1》.pdf（12页珍藏版）》请在麦多课文档分享上搜索。

1、 American Association of State Highway a n d Tra n s p o rt a t i o n Officials 444 North Capitol Street N W Cuite 249 Washington, C 20001 202-624-5800 phone 202-624-5806 fax www.transportation.org I O 2005 by the American Association of State Highway and Tiansportation Officials. Ali rights reserve

2、d Duplicatioti is a violation of applicable law ISBN 1-56051-272-5 Publication Code: RP-PAR-1 The photographs it1 this publication illustrate a variety of catastroptiic events, including earthquakes, hurricanes, and inajor blackouts that cati have impacts to transportatioii that are similar in magni

3、tude to a serious terrorist attach guided by a task group vvlitcli iiicluded David P Albriglit, Mara K Caiiipbell. Piiililj J Caruso, Joliii IV Contesrahile, Fi-ank Day, David C Ekern, Paul Gavin; Toiv Giaiicola, Ph Grazela; Joseph C Hill, Gary L Hoiiii1ai-, Greg Hull. Christopher A Kozub; Patricia

4、G. Kuiiar; David Deu Larson, PaulV Liles, Sievei? Moi?du, Sonia Pin, Wiary Lou Roi!-; Terry Simnionds; Steven L Ernst; Joliii Gerner; Charles Horan, Robert D Janiison, Miiceni P Peaice; Roljeit D Franr, Bruce A Hiiies, Antlionv R Kane; Iviatthew D Rabkiii, and C A. Falke!, CilP Senior Prograin Offic

5、er AASHTO Special Committee on Transportation Security Chair, David S. Ekein, PE Vice Chair, Vacant Secretary, Joliii Gernei, Federal Highway Administration Liaison, Vacant California, Randell H. Iwasaki District of Columbia, lviichelle L. Potii-ciaLi Florida, Frank Day Idaho, Alaii Frew Illinois, V

6、ictor Iviodeer Indiana, Ricliaid K. Sniutzer Maryland, John 1VI Contestabile Minnesota, Mark R. Wikelius Mississippi, Steven L Edwards New Jersey, Richard J. Gimello New Mexico, David P Albright New York, George Christian Pennsylvania, John Dockendoi f Region IV, Vacant Region V, Vacant Washington,

7、Gummada Murthy Wisconsin, Jeff rey L. Western U.S. DOT Member Federal Motor Carrier Safety Admin., Charles Horan FHWA, Steve Eriist, Michael Onder Vince Pearce FRA, Bill Fagan FTA, GallTaylor AASHTO Rachel Beyerle David H Clawson Valerie Kalhammer Anthony R. Kane Leo Penne Associate Members-Federal

8、SDDCTEA, Robert D. Franz TSA/DHS, Dan Hartniaii Ricky O. Smith . Virginia, Steven M Mondul AASHTO Executive Committee, 2004-2005 /otiiig Ivleiiibers OFFICERS President, .! Bryain Wicoi, indiana Vice President: Jack Leriiere, Neiv Jersev Secretary-Treasurer: Larry M King Penns/lvaiita REGIONAL REPRES

9、ENTATIVES REGION 1: Al leil Bieli ler, Pe ti ti sylvan ia, Oiie-Yea r Tei in1 Dai? Taiigherlini, Disirici of Columbia, Two-Year Teini Fernando Fagundo, Puerto Rico, One-Year Term Harold Linneiikolil, Georgia. Ti:o-YearTeriii Gloria Jeff, Micliigan, One-earTerii1 Frank Busalacchi, VVisconsin, Tvo-ear

10、Terni Tom Norton, Colorado, One-Year Teyrn David Spryiiczynatyk, North Dakota, Two-Yeor Terni REGION II: REGION 111: REGION IV No niiot i ng Ivieiii bers Immediate Past President: Joliii R Njord, Utal-i AASHTO Executive Director: Joliii Horsley, VVasliiiigion, DC Other ASCE. Jonathan C Esslinger, PE

11、 ITE, Philip J Caruso TRB, Steplian Parker AASHTO Washington, DC January 2005 On September 11, 2001, state departments of transportation (DOTS) - builders and operators of the nations busiest roads, tunnels, and bridges -were reminded vividly about the vital role that transportation often plays when

12、 emergency situations occur. As DOTs across the country went on high alert, the emergency capabilities of highway, transit, rail, and pedestrian systems in the NewYork and Washington, D.C. regions were tested severely. Transportation links functioned as evacuation routes and a way for emergency resp

13、onse teams to reach incident scenes. Virginia DOTS high-tech Traffic Management Center in Arlington, Virginia was even transformed into the incident command headquarters for emergency responders after American Airlines Flight 77 hit the Pentagon. In subsequent days and months, transportation agencie

14、s mobilized intensive construction efforts to help reconnect transportation links damaged by the terror attacks. State DOTs were able to act swiftly on September 11 because they were already equipped to meet the challenges of responding to and recovering from the devastation caused by natural and ma

15、n-made disasters. When incidents such as hurricanes, wildfires, earthquakes, or major traffic crashes threaten safety and mobility, DOT personnel and equipment are part of response and recovery activities. Their sophisticated traffic management systems help keep traffic moving; their information sys

16、tems help keep communications flowing; and their construction expertise helps speed recovery. The threat of terrorism, however, poses new challenges for state DOTs. Eighty percent of DOTs say they have incurred additional costs to improve transportation security, and overall security costs for DOTs

17、are expected to reach at least $10.5 billion over the next six years. Through the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, AASHTO and the state DOTs have invested heavily since 2001 in security-related studies, training, and research. More training, equipment, infrastructure hardening, and res

18、earch for DOTs is vital. To ensure the security of our nations transportation systems, AASHTO member DOTs and local, state, and federal agencies must become strong homeland security partners.This brochure gives an overview of why the security of our roads, bridges, and tunnels is important, what DOT

19、s are doing to improve it, and the keys to better partnership. Executive DirecLor AAS HTO David Ekern Director, Idaho Department of Transportation Chair, AASHTO Special Committee on Transportation Security PROTECTING AMERICAS ROADS, BRIDGES, AND TUNNELS: SUAUE DOUS-GUJARDIANS Off UWE NAUIONrS UWANSP

20、O WTAUIO N IN F WASTW Rn CTU W E The nations transportation system ensures workers get to their jobs, goods and services reach their destinations, and people stay connected. State DOTs keep the country moving. Together, they have primary responsibility for a system that includes most of the nations

21、busiest highways, bridges, and tunnels, and totals 1.8 million lane-miles. But DOTs are also multimodal agencies whose responsibilities often include passenger and freight rail, transit, ports, ferries, and aviation. Every day, vehicles travel five billion miles on state-owned roads2 and 89 percent

22、of all freight by value is shipped on highways3 Businesses rely on a “just-in-time“ economy in which a single unexpected incident can have significant effects. The week-long shutdown of all seaports and airports following September 11, for example, is estimated to have resulted in economic losses as

23、 great as the $50 billion World Trade Center costs. The apparent scale and redundancy of the nations transportation system gives a false sense of security, but in many parts of the country that system is straining to keep up with the transportation demands of society and the economy. Preliminary stu

24、dies suggest there are about 1,000 bridges across the country where substantial casualties and economic disruption would result from isolated attacks4 Seized AI Qaeda training manuals include missions for blasting and destroying bridges leading into and out of cities, and senior Al-Qaeda leaders in

25、US. custody have revealed that several U.S. landmark bridges were included on a list of possible targets for their terrorist network.The Mineta Institutes listing of terrorist activities shows terrorist-related incidents have occured in many states over the past five years (see map). The costs of fa

26、ilure to prepare for a terrorist attack that affects the nations transportation infrastructure, in terms of loss of life and economic disruption, could be catastrophic. Experts fear attacks that destroy or damage transportation infrastructure, for example using incendiary devices, handheld cutting d

27、evices that sever bridge components, release of chemical or biological agents in SECURI TY of Terrorism (Terrorism Knowledge Database) tunnels, or explosives would jeopardize safe, continuous movement of people and goods. Likewise, they agree that the costs of rebuilding following a major attack wou

28、ld be great. A Federal Highway Administration/AASHTO-sponsored Blue Ribbon Panel recently concluded that costs could exceed $10 billion for loss of a critical bridge or tnnel. In response to the threat of terror, state DOTs - the nations transportation infrastructure managers-are adapting and expand

29、ing their traditional functions to better protect transportation systems and preserve user safety. Foremost among DOTs expanded roles are: “ALL HAZARDS“ EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT. DOTs have always played a vital support role in emergency planning, response, and recovery situations. Today, they are workin

30、g to ensure terrorism-specific challenges are met. CRITICAL ASSET PROTECTION. DOTs are conducting assessments, investing resources, and incorporating new practices on an agency-wide basis to ensure protection of critical assets they oversee. The new roles DOTs are undertaking bring with them new dem

31、ands for training, research, resources, partnership, and communication that are described in this brochure. Total costs for protecting critical mobility assets, enhancing traffic management capabilities, and improving state DOT emergency response capabilities nationwide are conservatively estimated

32、to be $10.5 billion over the next six years.6 FHWA, Highway Statistics 2003,2004. FHWA, Highway Statistics 2003,2004. FHWA, Our Nationk Highways-ZUUU, 2002. Parsons Brinckerhoff and SAIC, National Needs Assessment for Ensuring Transportation lnfrastructure security, 2002. FHWA, Recommendations for B

33、ridge and Tunnel Security, 2003. Parsons Brinckerhoff and SAIC, National Needs Assessment for Ensuring Transportation lnfrastructure Security, 2002. The apparent scale and redundancy ofthe nations trans portation system gives a false sense of security, butin many parts ofthe county that system is st

34、raining to keep up with the transportation demands of society and the economy. 8 PROTECTING AMERICAS ROADS, BRIDGES, AND TUNNELS: tornadoes, hurricanes, or major traffic crashes, can be quite similar to those of terrorist attacks. Overloaded or blocked transportation infrastructure can slow down res

35、ponders, hamper evacuations, or trigger secondary incidents. As recovery efforts get underway, economic and social dislocation may be caused or worsened by damage to infrastructure or traffic problems. Over 90 percent of state DOTs have in place “all hazards” emergency management plans that enable t

36、hem to respond quickly to serious incidents regardless of their cause.7 All hazards planning” means that state DOTs are ready to work with other emergency responders in a variety of emergency preparedness, response, and recovery activities. When incidents directly affect the transportation network,

37、DOT field personnel may well become initial responders. Key functions include: TRAVELER INFORMATION. Keeping travelers informed is imperative for man- aging traffic during and after an incident. Information officers in DOTs are set up to work with radio and television media to share important inform

38、ation with the public. Agencies routinely use technologies such as the Internet, highway advisory radio, 511 travel information, and variable message signs to communicate information about road closures. detours. and evacuation routes to travelers, and to work with local transit agencies. TRAFFIC MA

39、NAGEMENT. Serious incidents are likely to require immediate implementation of temporary traffic management measures. In New York on September 11, for example, the George Washington Bridge in northern Manhattan was shut down minutes after the attack and a network of variable message signs up to 12 mi

40、les away was used to warn drivers and redirect traffic. Many DOTs operate IntelligentTransportation Systems (ITS) in larger cities and rely on electronic technology such as traffic cameras, ramp monitoring, roadway sensors, and message signs to monitor and manage traffic. They are equipped to suppor

41、t emergency responders by managing traffic and ensuring good responder access to incident sites. TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES, PERSONNEL, AND EQUIPMENT. During and after an incident, a wide variety of facilities, personnel, and equipment may be needed to provide adequate response. State DOTs are equipp

42、ed with a variety of passenger and utility vans and trucks, aircraft, and ground and operations personnel that can be mobilized statewide during and after an incident. Some DOTs even have their own state-wide wireless communication networks. DOTs also have vehicle repair facilities and personnel, pa

43、rking, and storage areas that can be used for staging, parking, and storage of THE ROLE OF STATE DOTS IN HOMELAND SECURITY emergency vehicles, and motor pool facilities and personnel for refueling DEFENSE against attacks by installing physical barriers that increase stand-off distances from vulnerab

44、le structural components, such as bridge piers or tunnel ventilation systems; and DESIGN AND RE-DESIGN of assets to harden them against potential attack methods, particularly explosive charges. THE ROLE OF STATE DOTS IN HOMELAND SECURITY DOTS Needs: A recent study estimates state DOTS capital and op

45、erating budget needs for protecting critical assets at $2.5 billion over the next six years.* Resources are needed to address: BRIDGE RETROFITS. Critical bridges must be retrofitted with countermeasures such as blast shielding, structural reinforcement, lighting, intrusion detection systems, barrier

46、s and fencing, and security patrols. BRIDGE RECONSTRUCTION. Most major bridge construction activity involves reconstruction or rehabilitation of structures as they reach the end of their useful life. As critical bridges are replaced or rehabilitated, an opportunity arises to incorporate more advance

47、d design features such as layout considerations, pier placement, and blast survivability. The marginal additional cost of these types of improvements is assumed to be about 20 percent of total bridge reconstruction costs.13 TUNNEL PROTECTION COSTS. Most tunnels are relatively robust and invulnerable

48、 to serious damage. Protection needs are primarily focused on enhanced detection and surveillance, and protection of sensitive areas such as portals and ventilation intakes. 11 AASHTOITRB, 2003 Survey of State Transportaion Agencies-Summary of Results, 2004. 12 Parsons Brinckerhoff and SAIC, Nationa

49、lNeeds Assessment for Ensuring Transportation 13 Parsons Brinckerhoff and SAIC, NationalNeeds Assessment for Ensuring Transportation Infrastructure Security, 2002. Infrastructure Security, 2002. Use ofvehicle or boat- born e explosives by terrorists could cause severe damage of structures. to or collapse PROTECTING AMERICAS ROADS, BRIDGES, AND TUNNELS: m7g lm FOR PARUNERSHIIF IN SECMRIV Just like their homeland security partners, state DOTs are establishing new security-related roles in response to the threat of terrori