EVP — Who Should Be Involved?

A key step in planning, deploying, and operating EVP systems is the formation of a stakeholder group. The first question is, "Who should be involved?" and the second is, "Who needs to talk to whom, i.e., what are our interoperability needs?"

Forming the Stakeholder Group

Stakeholder group membership depends on the individual jurisdiction — its governmental organization, the division of responsibilities for signal operation and maintenance, jurisdiction membership in regional Councils of Government (COGs), and participation of Citizen Action Committees (CACs). Table 3 lists the potential agencies and groups that may be included in a stakeholder group and indicates the roles each may have in the planning, installation, operations, and maintenance of EVP systems.

Evaluating the Need for Interoperability

Interoperability may be a key consideration in the selection of a particular EVP technology as the stakeholders identify the functional requirements of their own system and the requirement to support other neighboring jurisdictions as part of larger emergency response networks and mutual aid agreements. The following interoperability considerations may be useful to consider in selecting the best technology for a particular EVP application.

Participation in a regional emergency response network may lead stakeholders to consider how the EVP system would be used within the jurisdiction and across jurisdictional lines in the case of a large-scale regional emergency response. Certain routes within the region may be equipped with a particular technology to support travel to sites for which large-scale emergency response plans have been developed.

**Table 3. Potential Stakeholders and Roles**
Stakeholder	Responsibility
City or County Fire/Rescue and/or EMS Departments	Generally the proponents for the initiative Often key players in seeking Federal and state emergency response improvement funds
City or County Police Departments	Potential co-proponents, where police use is considered
City or County Transportation or Public Works Department	Integration with local transportation planning efforts including transit signal priority Often a key player in seeking Federal and state transportation improvement funds
City or County Planning Department	Integration with growth and development plans
City or County Traffic Operations Department (if applicable)	Planning, integration, testing, and installation Supporting operations, including system access permissions and system event record keeping Developing and supporting execution of maintenance concepts
City or County Executive Risk Management (if applicable)	Identifying the impact on loss rates suffered in EV crashes Identifying the liability associated with delayed emergency response Identifying liability issues associated with EVP operations
City or County Disaster Response or Homeland Security Departments (if applicable)	Potential co-proponents for the initiative Often key players in seeking Federal and state emergency response improvement funds
State Department of Transportation	For jurisdictions that do own and operate their own signal systems: Integration of local signal operations with state operated and maintained systems For jurisdictions that do not own and operate their own signal systems: Planning, integration, testing, and coordinating for installation Supporting operations, including system access permissions and system event record keeping Ensuring development of maintenance memoranda of agreement with the agency that owns the EVP equipment and supporting execution of maintenance concepts
Council of Governments Representative	Act as coordinator with other jurisdictions within the participating region, identifying interoperability issues and cost-sharing opportunities
Citizens Action Committee Representative	Act as a proponent for improved public safety Help promote public awareness

Memberships in mutual aid agreements may require that all users of the system have access to systems in neighboring jurisdictions to facilitate mutual aid coverage in fringe areas or to access specialized apparatus when required.
Planned or future transit signal priority should be considered as a means to develop a larger stakeholder base and to spread the costs among a wider group that has access to a variety of funding sources such as those committed to congestion management and clean air attainment. Figure 5 illustrates the need for coordination of efforts as public safety and transit agencies work with transportation and traffic officials as they plan signal system enhancements.
Many localities invest in EVP as a way of speeding access to regional medical facilities. However, these facilities are often served by emergency vehicles from several different jurisdictions. If the purpose of the EVP system is solely to provide access to these medical facilities and will only be installed at intersections approaching them, then a sound-based system may be the best option. Using this technology, EVs' own sirens activate the signal preemption system so no special equipment is required on the vehicles.

Photo of a bus and firetruck approaching an intersection on a collision course.
Figure 5. A Bus and a Hook and Ladder Meet in Alexandria, Virginia Without EVP

Table 4 shows the impact of interoperability conditions on the usability of various EVP technology options.

**Table 4. Summary of Interoperability Considerations**
Level of Interoperability	Light or Infrared Strobe Activated	Siren Activated	Strobe Activated
Emergency Response Route	Yes, equip all participants	Yes	Yes, equip all participants
Mutual Aid Agreement	Yes, equip all participants	Yes	Yes, equip all participants
Transit Signal Priority	Yes, equip all participants	No	No
Regional Medical Center	Yes, equip all participants	Yes	Yes, equip all participants

Previous | Next