DRAFT-SOO_7-_First_Responder_Routing_Logic_Guide.pdf

First Responder Routing Logic Guide Statement of Objectives

February 13, 2017 Science and Technology Directorate Department of Homeland Security

DISTRIBUTION NOTICE: Further dissemination only as directed by DHS Office of Policy DESTRUCTION NOTICE: Destroy by any method that will prevent disclosure of contents or reconstruction of the document.

Table of Contents

1.0 Problem Statement

2.0 Purpose and Scope

3.0 Background Environment

3.1 Mission Scenarios

3.2 Current Technology Shortfalls and Threats

4.0 Potential Solution Attributes

4.1 Concept of Operations (CONOPS)

4.2 Additional Capabilities

5.0 Solution Capabilities and Requirements

5.1 Must Have Requirements

5.2 Desirable Capabilities or Characteristics

6.0 System Support

6.1 Period and Place of Performance

6.2 Contract Deliverables

6.3 Regulatory/Legal Requirements

6.4 System Affordability

6.5 Training

6.6 Other Considerations

6.7 Storage and Maintenance

First Responder Routing Logic Guide Statement of Objectives February 13, 2017

1.0 Problem Statement

The proposed solution is supported by the Project Responder (PR) 4 communications capability need: “The capability to seamlessly and dynamically connect multiple persons or entities and convey meaningful and actionable information to all relevant parties.”1 During the 2016 First Responder Resource Group (FRRG) Meeting, first responder subject matter experts identified a need for an emergency responder routing system that would inform responders of upcoming road and traffic conditions and suggest alternate routes to safely and efficiently navigate their vehicles.

Currently, many first responders are utilizing commercially available mapping applications such as Google maps on their cell phones to route themselves to incidents that they are dispatched to instead of using traditional Automatic Vehicle Location (AVL) systems. The reasons for this deviation include budget constraints, the simplicity of user interfaces and availability of applications on cell phones, and greater frequency of map updates. However, commercially available applications and current AVL systems do not include other road options that first responders could consider to decrease incident response and egress times.

2.0 Purpose and Scope

This solution shall create additional layers to existing solutions (e.g., AVL or similar) or a new application for first responders to meet the additional needs that they have while navigating roadways to incidents. The general issue with traditional street routing applications is that they are consumer-based and abide by the rules of the road and jurisdictional operation procedures. First responders have additional needs such as having the ability to take in external data sources for transit schedules (e.g., trains, draw bridges, public transit) as well as taking advantage of public and private property (e.g., right-of-ways, emergency access roads), express lanes, the ability to exceed speed limits, etc. Increasing first responder awareness of additional passable routes while also considering backups due to emergency incidents, traffic, weather-related issues or other irregularities will allow for the quickest response to an incident.

3.0 Background Environment

Historically, computer-aided dispatch (CAD) systems have been used by public safety agencies to assign specific emergency response units (i.e., fire service, law enforcement, and emergency medical services) to incidents as they occur. First responders increasingly are using commercially available mapping software applications to reach incidents rather than their readily available mapping systems which are typically vehicle-mounted (e.g., AVL Systems). Consumer-based street routing abides by the public’s rules of the road which also apply to first responders. By using the same applications as the general public, first responders are not able to navigate alternative routes such as property, public transit, express lanes, alternate direction down a one-way road, emergency access roads, etc. Many first responders, who typically reside in the area of response, rely upon their personal knowledge of the area, roads, right-of-ways, regular traffic patterns (which may vary based on time of day, day of week, holidays and abnormal incidents such as roadwork or utility maintenance) and familiarity with transit schedules (e.g. trains, drawbridges, etc.) to maneuver to/from an incident as quickly as possible. Delays or changes in normally expected schedules cannot be accounted for while using prior knowledge from one’s experiences.

1 Department of Homeland Security, Security and Technology Directorate, “Project Responder 4: 2014 National Technology Plan for Emergency Response to Catastrophic Incidents”, Page 57.

The solution may be able to leverage existing platforms and databases, customizing them for emergency response needs. It would likely entail the use of a smartphone application (e.g., Google Maps) with first responder enhancement filters. Although it could integrate with multiple existing systems, the proposed solution would first integrate with commonly used platforms to start (e.g., IOS, Android). In addition, the solution should be able to calculate the best routing for emergency vehicles that utilize lights and sirens to clear paths/avoid signals and account for the size and weight restrictions of emergency response vehicles, which is missing from traditional mapping applications.

3.1 Mission Scenarios

This solution will directly impact the time spent arriving safely to the scene of an incident by first responders as well as the amount of time spent transporting patients to nearby hospitals or related facilities. By decreasing the transit time of first responders, lives may be saved, recovery times may be shortened, and damage occurring at the incident may be lessened no matter what discipline is responding.

In addition, the use of a first responder-tailored tool would negate the need for usage of publicly operated applications that are not sanctioned. Moreover, the solution will be best suited to first responders in a hands-free capacity so that the first responders can navigate their routes effectively without the distraction of looking at a phone or tablet.

3.2 Current Technology Shortfalls and Threats

Public Safety CAD systems only take legal routes (i.e., public traffic laws) into consideration despite the fact that many utilize real-time or crowdsourced traffic and transit information. This means that first responders may quickly come upon traffic that they cannot circumvent or proactively avoid. The practical technological solution that is often used by first responders regarding routing and mapping issues is a product such as Waze (owned by Google's parent company, Alphabet Inc.). Waze is a Global Positioning System (GPS)-based geographical navigation application program for smartphones and tablets with GPS support which provides turn-by-turn information and utilizes user-submitted incidents, travel times, and route details. Waze considers user-generated problems such as potholes, road construction, and stopped vehicles. While this is very helpful to the average consumer, first responders have additional needs.

First responders need the most direct path (or the “correct” path) however, this is not always the best path due to traffic, side streets, narrow roads, speed bumps, express lanes, bus lanes, etc. The optimal path is generally to take a primary road and have the civilian vehicles move over so as not to obstruct the first responder’s path. Additionally, EMS personnel need to know the ingress and egress to and from an incident while responding. Current software options do not account for these needs.

4.0 Potential Solution Attributes

This technology will act as mapping software; similar to what is currently available but with expanded performance to suit the first responders needs. It should be very user friendly, with minimal training needs, since the solution will be used under hazardous conditions (i.e., high rate of vehicle speed, populated areas, etc.). The software must have detailed knowledge that is currently not integrated into maps, such as shoulder widths on highways (they vary per road and may not always be wide enough for emergency vehicles) or the size of a median strip. In addition, the software should be able to provide any risks associated with non-traditional routes (which might include private property, public transit, express lanes, and emergency access roads), such as median strip too high for safe vehicle passage; or presence of an incident that would slow transit using that non-traditional route. It should also have the ability to take in external data sources such as transit schedules (trains, draw bridges etc.).

The software should maximize hands-free operation, having the ability to integrate with existing vehicle mounted systems (e.g. display is duplicated on CAD and/or existing in vehicle computers).

4.1 Concept of Operations (CONOPS)

A first responder will open the software application on their cell phone or tablet and take advantage of the user-friendly interface to navigate to or from the scene of the incident. The software will suggest how to navigate around traffic utilizing the knowledge of current traffic, side streets, narrow roads, express lanes, bike lanes and bus lanes that are available as well as other detriments to travel for first responder apparatuses. The software will guide them to their destination using the fastest route as well as calculate the estimated travel time and any risks (such as congestion or roadside construction) that might impact estimated travel time.

4.2 Additional Capabilities

There are operational procedures which vary across jurisdictions. Therefore, the solution must have a toggling system to turn certain features on and off when required by a given jurisdiction. For example, some jurisdictions allow certain first responders and/or vehicles to circumvent some “normal” traffic rules; however, not all have the same criteria. Additionally, the software must account for the physical limitations of emergency vehicles (both four-wheel drive (4WD) and two-wheel drive (2WD)) traveling on certain roadways/structures.

5.0 Solution Capabilities and Requirements

5.1 Must Have Requirements (Key Performance Parameters, KPP’s) The proposed solution must:

• Leverage a commonly used existing platform (e.g., IOS or Android) and customize it for emergency response needs with a filter overlay;

• Implement a toggling system to turn certain features on and off per jurisdiction;, o Jurisdictional policies must be considered and options to enable/disable according to policies integrated, For example, one jurisdiction may allow driving the wrong way down a one-way street while others would not; thus there must be a switch to turn this function on or off;

• Integrate into current first responder software systems as dispatch must be cognizant of vehicle location and direction at all times;

• Provide alternate route data as well as automatic updates of new routes;

• Provide alerts to drivers regarding non-traditional routes (parking lots, open medians, unused railroad tracks and private roads); and,

• Provide after-action data that highlights the time differences between the traditional route and the system’s recommended route.

5.2 Desirable Capabilities or Characteristics

The proposed solution should:

• Add new routes to the mapping software and map library automatically as new routes become available;

• Alert emergency drivers of additional non-traditional options, however, highlight those that are not necessarily recommended by their jurisdiction (e.g., open medians, unused railroad tracks, private roads, etc.)

• If a non-traditional route is utilized and this route was deemed successful (i.e., reduced transit time), update the map library to include this non-traditional route;

• Provide an after action report that:

o Highlights the time difference between the most likely civilian route and the alternative or non-traditional route solution; and,

• Integrate response programs such as Active911 that allow for text messaging between dispatchers and responders traveling to an incident to acknowledge that they are en route

• If approved by necessary authorities, the solution may be configured to control traffic lights during emergencies

• Provide a chart of categories that drivers could toggle through and select as preferences such as:

o Database integration examples:

- Real-time traffic

- Weather

- Transit (e.g., Bus, train, etc.)

- Mapping

- Holidays o General Traffic alternatives available to responders:

- Ability to exceed speed limit

- Ability to go wrong way down one-way streets

- Ability to drive on the wrong side of road

- Express lanes

- Median strips

- Use of Private property

- Ability to drive on road shoulders, etc.

6.0 System Support

6.1 Period and Place of Performance

The anticipated period of performance for the contract shall be between 12-18 months, and shall not exceed the latter. All developmental activities will be performed at the contractor-designated site(s). DHS may require the contractor to perform preliminary and critical design reviews and/or product presentations at DHS-specified locations.

6.2 Contract Deliverables

DHS is committed to ensuring the success of their technology by requiring the project performer to provide DHS with ten (10) prototype deliverables which will be used for post-contract testing and evaluation.

DHS is also committed to ensuring the use of their technology by the first responder community by documenting metrics regarding product sales and estimated production costs for the first three years after commercialization. Additionally, to promote first responder technology awareness DHS may participate in operational exercises, demonstrations, and conferences for the first three years after commercialization.

6.3 Regulatory/Legal Requirements

DHS is committed to providing information regarding the availability of their technology to the first responder community by requiring the project performer to submit applications to be added to the DHS Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Authorized Equipment List (AEL) and the Inter-Agency Board for Equipment Standardization and Interoperability (IAB) Standardized Equipment List (SEL) as a final deliverable.

6.4 System Affordability

It is envisioned that the solution will be cost effective so that first responders from a wide variety of jurisdictions will be able to afford this software. First responders’ budgets are limited and should be taken into consideration when developing and determining a price per unit cost model; products need to be at a price point that will be acceptable for first responder community.

6.5 Training

Training information as required shall be provided on any specialized equipment, and shall include how to properly store, clean, deploy, and maintain the basic ensemble/unit. If a replaceable part is included in the device, proper procedures for replacing that part should be specified. Any specialty requirements of personnel conducting maintenance, storage, extraction, or delivery will be identified including certification requirements. Training material shall be available initially in hard-copy, and subsequently in soft-copy (electronic) format.

6.6 Other Considerations

Human Interface Requirements: The target user includes emergency response units (fire service, law enforcement, emergency medical services) or any public safety agencies that utilize CAD systems. The solution should be simple and easy to navigate for first responders and other emergency personnel.

Logistics and Readiness: The solution developed under this award is envisioned as an improved routing & mapping application for first responders.

6.7 Storage and Maintenance

The contractor shall identify all necessary storage and maintenance requirements for the proposed solution including: the required maintenance schedule, if any cleaning or maintenance is needed for the solution either during use or in order to be reused subsequent times, identification of the specific components of the solution that requires the maintenance, the type of maintenance required, and whether the maintenance can be performed in the field by operational personnel or if it will be required to be returned to the manufacturer for the required maintenance.

In the case of software solutions, the contractor must provide estimated upgrade frequency and cost of maintenance.