So far at this Symposium, we have for the most part heard the good news—Integrated Transportation Management Systems are going to provide public agencies the means to better manage traffic and provide useful services to the traveling public. We have heard how a combination of advanced technologies involving networked computers, complex software, fiber optic and microwave communication systems, detectorization of all of our highways, CCTV, changeable message signs, highway advisory radio, and much more will make this possible. The bad news is that most of this new high-tech equipment and software will be the responsibility of state and local agencies to operate and maintain. If we're not careful, this wonderful dream could turn into our worst nightmare as inadequate resources are overwhelmed by the demands of operations and maintenance. This looming problem has been referred to as the potential "Achilles’ Heel of ITS" ¹.

Fortunately, operations and maintenance of ITS projects was recognized as a major problem facing public agencies several years ago. As a result, there have been surveys, studies, white papers, seminars, and work shops devoted to this issue. In this paper, I will briefly summarize these past efforts devoted to a better understanding of the problem and then discuss the primary issues that public agencies need to address in order to adequately operate and maintain Integrated Transportation Management Systems (ITMS). These issues are organized into four broad categories: implementation, expertise, institutional, and funding.

BACKGROUND

In 1990, the FHWA Office of Program Review conducted a survey of 24 representative traffic control systems deployed by state and local agencies. The report on this survey found that 21 of the systems inspected did not meet minimum standards of performance due to inadequate operations and maintenance ². Needless to say, these findings raised concerns regarding the plans for a national ITS program involving deployment of advanced technologies, when state and local agencies were for the most part not up to operating and maintaining much less complex technologies.

The FHWA immediately established an internal Task Force to investigate what actions they might take to improve the situation. The FHWA Task Force report was submitted in March of 1991 ³. The FHWA also established an Expert Panel composed of representatives from state and local agencies, a consulting firm, and an university. The Expert Panel report was completed in March of 1992, and contained 34 recommendations for consideration by the FHWA, state and local agencies ⁴. Both the Task Force and the Expert Panel reports identified the need to expand the eligibility of Federal gas tax funds for purposes of operations and maintenance of traffic control systems.

The FHWA incorporated the highest priority recommendations of the Expert Panel report into an Action Plan which was released in November, 1992 ⁵. The Action Plan also noted nine other FHWA projects that would contribute to the improved operations and maintenance of traffic control systems.

The General Accounting Office performed its own review of the problems that are preventing state and local agencies from realizing the benefits from traffic control systems. The GAO submitted a report on their study to the House of Representatives Committee on Energy and Commerce in March of 1994 ⁶. The GAO report essentially reinforced the conclusions of the earlier reports and recommended several specific actions for the FHWA.

As a result of the FHWA Action Plan, the ITE contracted with the FHWA to perform certain tasks as part of the ITE/FHWA Joint Project on Urban Traffic Engineering. This project included mail and phone surveys of state and local agencies, and focus groups. Three reports based on these surveys are nearing completion ^{7, 8, 9}.

In October of 1994 a National Conference on Operating and Maintaining Traffic Control Systems was held in Dallas, Texas. To stimulate discussion at the Conference, nine white papers on various aspects of operating and maintaining Traffic Control Systems were prepared ¹⁰. A final report on the Conference was also prepared and distributed ¹¹. Following the Conference, a seminar was held sponsored by the ITE Educational Foundation which included additional papers and background information on the subject of Operations and Maintenance ¹².

Another related task contracted to the ITE was the establishment of a national clearing house for the distribution of information on traffic control systems. The clearing house includes a toll free hot line and an electronic bulletin board.

Recognizing the importance of operations and maintenance of traffic control systems, the ITE’s ITS Council has established a task force committee to investigate this subject area.

In the past, more often than not, an analysis of operations and maintenance requirements has been left until the near the end of the design phase of the project. As a result, design trade-off analyses of various options, performed earlier in the project, often have not adequately considered the long term "life-cycle" operations and maintenance cost and staffing consequences. Furthermore, personnel who will be responsible for operations and maintenance tasks are not always included in design reviews. The adverse consequences of these past practices will be even more severe with regard to implementing future ITMS projects that utilize advanced technologies. The following suggestions are made to better insure that the final design of an ITMS fully reflects operations and maintenance requirements and limitations:

Adoption of uniform design standards for hardware, software, communications, and installation that are consistent throughout the multi-jurisdictional area covered by the ITMS will serve to reduce the complexity of the integrated system, simplify hardware interfaces, and reduce long term operations and maintenance problems.

The use of the National Traffic Control/ITS Communications Protocol (NTCIP) Standard currently under development will provide for communication between traffic management centers and traffic signal controllers initially and other types of field traffic devices as the protocol is expanded.

In the case of software development for ITMS projects, an Open Systems Environment (OSE) and extensive use of commercial off-the-shelf (COTS) products should be specified whenever possible. An Open Systems Environment is a complete environment for the development and implementation of computing systems based on a publicly available set of interfaces, protocols, services, and supporting documents. The basic objectives of an OSE is to provide portability, scalability, and interoperability. Adoption of an OSE should reduce development costs as well as long term maintenance and training costs.

State and local procurement processes that worked acceptably for building highways or low-tech signal control systems are usually not suitable for ITMS projects. The implementation of ITMS projects poses new challenges involving not only the integration of numerous advanced technologies, but also multi-jurisdictional compatibility. There has been a general recognition of the need to update procurement practices of public agencies to meet the specific requirements of advanced technology systems.

The most recent discussion of this issue can be found in the National ITS Program Plan ¹³. This report recommends studies aimed at streamlining Federal regulatory requirements regarding projects and identifying revisions in State procurement guidelines. Areas of procurement reform suggested are:

Procurement limitations requiring strict adherence to acceptance of low-bid system components can result in poor reliability, incompatible equipment from different sources performing the same functions, and multi-jurisdictional system integration problems. Higher operations and maintenance costs are usually the result. Where advanced technologies and/or multi-jurisdictional ITMS are involved, the flexibility to deviate from low-bid regulations needs to be considered.

A rigorous construction inspection program for all field installed equipment is a good investment for identifying and correcting system installation deficiencies before they become maintenance problems. This is particularly true of communication cabling and loop detectors.

A formal system acceptance testing plan for ITMS implementation projects should be a requirement. As in the case of construction inspection, system testing will yield a significant payoff relative to reducing future maintenance problems. The system testing plan should utilize a building block approach for software, hardware, and system integration. For example, field hardware components would be tested prior to installation, at the subsystem level after integration with communications and software, and at the full system level in conjunction with other system elements.

Extensive documentation of installed ITMS hardware and software can serve to mitigate the time required to diagnose and correct the inevitable operations and maintenance problems encountered after acceptance of the system. Unfortunately, it has been the experience with many systems that these products are not produced until the end of the project when remaining funds are usually running low. This is another task where an additional up-front investment can result in significant long term benefits.

In the past, state and local agencies usually have not fully anticipated the resources that were required to operate and maintain traffic control systems. The ITMS that are currently in the planning and development stage will present even greater demands on the responsible agencies. These demands involve the addition of new staff and the creation of appropriate position descriptions for the types of personnel needed to operate the advanced technologies comprising ITMS. A greater emphasis on electronic engineering, computer science, and digital technician skills will be required to maintain micro-electronic circuits, communication networks composed of fiber optics and wireless components, closed circuit television, changeable message signs, and computer systems. Engineers with strong traffic operations backgrounds will be needed to staff the operations centers.

No specific national guidelines currently exist for determining the staffing requirements for operating and maintaining ITMS. This is no doubt due to the large number of variables involved and the differences between each ITMS project. Staffing requirements can and should be developed well before the installation of the ITMS. These requirements should be based to a large extent on maintaining minimum levels of system performance. For example, a loop failure would be only tolerated for a specified period of time after identification. The number of staff required to meet such minimum performance levels would be expected to vary from system to system depending on the type of equipment deployed, the amount of equipment, the geographic extent of the system, the hours and days of operation, the functions performed, and estimates of the mean time to failure of various system components.

Frequent turnover of operations and maintenance staff can adversely affect ITMS performance. The ability of the public agency to pay competitive wage rates and provide career promotional paths for the positions required should be evaluated by management. The expectation of achieving these personnel objectives within a sometimes resistant Civil Service System may not be realistic. If personnel adjustments appear necessary that can not be made in the time required, then consideration should be given to out-sourcing the required functions to private contractors.

An on-going training program should be developed prior to the turn-on date of ITMS. This training program should focus on three phases—system installation, the period just prior to system turn-on, and the long term period of system operation.

Ideally, the core staff should have been hired and basic training performed during system installation. This is an excellent time for "over-the-shoulder" training.

The second phase of training consists of the prime contractor and sub-contractors providing agency staff with class room and "hands-on" training in all essential operations and maintenance functions prior to system turn-on.

After system turn-on, the training program should take advantage of the large number of training opportunities available through University short courses, the National Highway Institute courses, the Local Transportation Assistance Program (LTAP), U.S. DOT Transportation Centers and Advanced Institutes Programs, and ITE workshops and seminars. The objective of such training should be to move beyond performance of the basic function which can be largely learned from the prime contractor’s training course and operations and maintenance manuals. An ITMS is a very powerful traffic management tool that can achieve the expected high performance standards only with an adequately trained and motivated staff.

Maintenance contracts for certain specialized equipment such as computers is the usual case. General system maintenance and system operation tasks for the last generation of traffic control systems, however, have been normally performed by public agency staff. With the advent of large scale multi-jurisdictional ITMS, the advantages of contracting additional maintenance and even control center operations functions are greater due to economies of scale. The multi-jurisdictional ITMS can allow for pooling of funds from several public agencies and the single administration of larger contracts. This relieves the smaller agencies of the burden of maintaining the advanced technologies implemented by ITMS. Also, the larger agencies with prime responsibilities for the ITMS operation and maintenance can focus more on administration of the activity rather than developing and retaining highly specialized staff.

The INFORM system in Long Island, New York, is a good example of this type of long term contracting arrangement for operations and maintenance of an ITMS.

The process for implementing an ITMS can take many forms. Inter-agency cooperation is essential for the success of these endeavors. Agreements regarding operations and maintenance responsibilities and levels of effort will be required and should be established prior to actual construction of the ITMS during the preliminary design stage. Allocation of funds for ITMS project improvements in participating jurisdictions should be made contingent on such agreements.

During the course of the design of the ITMS, but prior to system turn-on, it will be necessary to establish policies and procedures for the coordination of inter-jurisdictional operations. These procedures must cover such issues as incident management, congestion management, diversion of traffic from freeways to city streets, messages placed on CMS, ramp metering and closure policies, and coordination of traffic signals at jurisdictional boundaries.

The convening of a team of representatives from all participating jurisdictions to develop a consensus on these policy and procedure issues will be required. In addition to formal agreements on the operational policies, many of the procedures may be incorporated into the operations software developed for the ITMS. For example in the case of the Los Angeles Smart Corridor Project, the inter-jurisdictional operational responses to specific traffic conditions and events have been directly input into an on-line expert system.

An ITMS will often be composed of a few large and a number of smaller local agencies. The smaller local agencies will often not have the in-house technical capabilities to adequately maintain the ITMS equipment under their jurisdiction. In these cases, consideration should be given to joint jurisdictional maintenance agreements in which one of the larger agencies provides maintenance for the less capable agencies. However, this will open the larger agency to additional tort liability exposure which may not be acceptable. In those cases, the use of private contracting for maintenance should be considered. As noted previously, one contract could be issued covering the maintenance requirements for several agencies.

Technology Transfer

The organizational structure created for an ITMS also opens up new opportunities for technology transfer among the cooperating state and local agencies. Local agencies are often unaware of the results of research and development efforts sponsored by the FHWA despite an active technology transfer program. Also, participants in ITMS projects may conduct their own research into the effectiveness of various operational strategies and develop new improved maintenance procedures. The closer public agency relationships fostered by the ITMS projects should facilitate the more frequent sharing of this valuable technical information among all participating agencies.

The traditional organization of transportation departments often works against the appropriate allocation of maintenance resources to ITMS. These systems are typically designed in one division, operated in another division, and maintained in yet another division. Since ITMS is a relatively new product, maintenance supervisors are not always aware of the criticality of certain types of routine maintenance and also may view this new responsibility as a lower priority than more familiar functions.

In order to better insure that the maintenance of ITMS is given the necessary priority it deserves, it may be necessary to reorganize the transportation department. A matrix type organization in which the manager in charge of ITMS operations is also given some authority over the maintenance of ITMS equipment would serve to mitigate the existing internal organizational problems.

FUNDING ISSUES

The establishment of an adequate and dependable long term funding source for ITMS projects is probably the major challenge facing state and local agencies. This problem has historical roots in the manner by which highway projects including those involving traffic control have been funded. Funds for design and implementation come from one budgetary source (often Federal gas tax) and funds for operations and maintenance come from another source (often the General Fund in the case of local agencies). This separation in funding sources has frequently resulted in ample funds for project implementation and inadequate funds for critical operations and maintenance functions. This, in turn, has resulted in progressive degradation in system performance.

Over the past 15 years, the financial condition of most local governments has noticeably worsened, with tax payer revolts such as Proposition 13 in California reducing General Fund revenues for cities and counties to the point that little is left over for anything but the most vital services. State transportation agencies are also experiencing much tighter budgets which often result in reducing operations and maintenance activities. Furthermore, the state and local transportation agencies are usually at a severe competitive disadvantage relative to the many competing programs which can muster bus loads of constituents to pack legislative chambers and can more effectively utilize lobbyists for their interests.

It cannot be reasonably expected that this situation will improve anytime soon. Consequently, the expectation of adequate operations and maintenance funds for our ITMS projects is not favorable unless new sources of funding are found.

Certain provisions of ISTEA go part way towards a solution to this problem of funding operations and maintenance. Two years of startup costs are allowed for projects funded under the National Highway System. Under provisions of the Surface Transportation Program, ITMS operating costs can be funded indefinitely. The Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality Program (CMAQ) allows for two years of operating costs.

These provisions in ISTEA are certainly a move in the right direction compared to previous restrictions on the use of Federal gas tax funds for operations and maintenance purposes. Every effort should be made, however, to revise this legislation to allow complete flexibility by state and local agencies in the allocation of Federal gas tax funds to operations and maintenance of ITMS. It is noteworthy that Europe and Japan do not generally place the types of restrictions on funding operations and maintenance that we do in the United States.

State and local agencies should also be more proactive in their use of currently available ISTEA funds for operations of ITMS. One of the best current examples of such use of ISTEA is New York City which has budgeted $7.4 million annually from the Surface Transportation Program for the operation of their ITMS ¹⁴.

State and local agencies cannot rely entirely on the Federal gas tax for operations and maintenance of ITMS projects. At a minimum, matching funds will be required. To the extent that any restrictions on the use of state gas tax funds for operations and maintenance of ITMS by local agencies exist, they should be removed. Furthermore, it would be in the interest of insuring long term continuity of operations and maintenance to allocate a set amount of annual state gas tax funds for this purpose. The formula allocation for operations and maintenance would be best made at the time of approval of implementation funds for ITMS projects.

Progress has been made in the last five years in raising the level of consciousness of the ITS community to the importance of giving greater emphasis to the operations and maintenance functions in order to achieve the expectations of improved mobility and safety.

A number of relatively recent studies, reports, and services provide useful information for developing more effective operations and maintenance programs.

Greater attention does need to be devoted during the design process to decisions on equipment, software, and installation procedures that will minimize long term life-cycle operations and maintenance costs, even though first costs may be higher.

The use of existing open standards for communications and software should be used whenever possible.

Antiquated procurement procedures need to be revised in order to allow for deviations from low cost bid requirements and other restrictions that prevent the implementation of systems that will minimize life-cycle operations and maintenance costs.

State and local agencies will be hard pressed to provide staff with the necessary skills to operate and maintain ITMS on an uninterrupted long term basis and should consider private contracting of various functions.

Training of state and local agency staff should start nearer the beginning of the implementation phase rather than at the end which is often the case.

ITMS programs should require agreement by all participating agencies on a minimum level of operations and maintenance support prior to allocation of funds.

The implementation of ITMS opens up new opportunities for inter-agency cooperation on operations and maintenance within regional areas.

Given the expectation that the financial conditions of state and local agencies will not improve in the foreseeable future, the historical restrictions on the use of Federal gas tax capital funding sources for operations and maintenance activities needs to be reconsidered. ISTEA and/or its successor should be revised to allow for full flexibility in the allocation of funds for ITMS operations and maintenance purposes.

State gas tax funds should also be made fully available to local agencies for operations and maintenance of ITMS, and where possible allocated for this purpose on a long term basis upon approval of the project.