4.8 TMS-07 Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks

4.8.1 ITS service at a glance

4.8.2 ITS service profile

4.8.2.1 General ITS service description

“Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks” means the elaboration, application and quality control of Traffic Management Plans (TMPs) for the management of the European network and corridors including cross-regional, cross-border and multi-modal aspects.

A TMP is the pre-defined allocation of a set of measures to a specific situation in order to control and guide traffic flows as well as to inform road-users in real-time and provide a consistent and timely service. Initial situations can be unforeseeable (incidents, accidents) or predictable (recurrent or non-recurrent events). The measures are always applied on a temporary basis. TMPs can be based on the full range of feasible traffic control, route guidance and traveller information measures, not only depending on the initial situation but also on available facilities (see also 4.8.3.3).

Deployment of TMPs ensures a higher level of service in terms of increased traffic efficiency on the network and improved safety in terms of incident response and mitigation through a consistent and effective delivery of traffic control, route guidance and information measures to the road user.

4.8.2.2 What is the vision?

The vision of the European ITS Core Service “Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks” is the effective delivery of traffic control, route guidance and information measures to the road user in a consistent manner, thus increasing the performance of transport infrastructure by adding the potential of cross-border, network or multi-stakeholder/cross-competence co-operation, when needed. Through strengthening the cooperation and the mutual understanding of road operators in conurbations and on the cross-national/international level the provision of a co-ordinated approach for elaboration, application and quality control of traffic management measures will be achieved.

Properly developed multiple level TMPs react to various traffic situations in a timely and effective manner. They optimise the use of existing traffic infrastructure capacities and provide the platform for a cross-border seamless service with consistent information for the road user.

The visions on behalf of the road user are:

• to provide seamless, language independent and consistent cross-border and traffic management and traveller information,
• to consider the network as a whole to optimise the use of existing traffic infrastructure capacities and
• to permanently enhance the quality of service provided by the traffic management service.

The visions on behalf of the road operators are:

• to come to a harmonised understanding as well as a co-ordinated, consistent deployment and application of traffic management measures on an operational level in locations where various stakeholders such as road operators and traffic police share traffic management responsibilities,
• to strengthen the cooperation and the mutual understanding of road operators in conurbations and on cross-national/ international levels,
• to exchange know-how and experience in developing tools for the development and testing of traffic management plans between the stakeholders on a European level and
• to establish co-operation not only between public road operators but also with private service providers using in-car facilities to disseminate public traffic management plans, so that they align their traffic behaviour with the overarching strategies of public road operators (see Traffic Management 2.0^[1]).

4.8.2.3 What is the mission?

Cross-border/cross-competence deployment

• Different political, legal, technical and organisational basic conditions, language (even dialects) and cultural differences of partners:
  • Take into account the individual backgrounds and requirements of each partner; determine a common understanding in a LoI (Letter of Intent) or a MoU (Memorandum of Understanding). à In advance of pre-defining TMPs, all partners have to have a clear understanding of each other’s needs and requirements.
  • Define a common harmonised glossary and map in advance.

• Different responsibilities inside the organisational structure of each partner: 
  • Define a “single entry point” on the operational level. Avoid escalating every single operational problem to the management level.

• In most countries, broadcasting companies cannot be forced to broadcast specific traveller information or re-routing recommendations, which leads to inconsistent information: 
  • Involve broadcasters and other service providers from the start and foster a good relationship with them. In some cases, broadcasting companies share databases or have their operators in the TCC.

• Possible problems of language and/or interpretation by the road user: 
  • Communication to the road user as far as possible through clear and mono-interpretable pictorial signs. Use of language only as explanation for the signs used.

Re-routing TMPs:

• Insufficient capacity on the alternative routes or road operators affected by the re-routing are not willing to accept re-routing on routes or secondary roads with limited capacity and/or excessive traffic-related environmental impact: 
  • Intense advance planning and coordination processes between the various authorities involved and co-ordinated TMP activation process on the basis of mutual confidence in event assessment and activation requests is necessary.
  • A common pre-definition of prioritization between the impacted partners is necessary and agreements on how to prioritize traffic management measures to handle various incident types. à Other measures such as information, vehicle storage areas, modal shift or access control should be considered.

• The cost of tolls to the road user has a considerable influence in their route selection. 
  • The decision criteria “price” has to be considered and eventually communicated.

• Inconsistent service content between publicly financed road operators and private service providers. The prompt deactivation of a measure in case of an incident cancellation through private service providers seems to be a problem. 
  • Involve private service providers in the TMP elaboration process and develop framework agreements between public financed road operators and service providers to share information (see Traffic Management 2.0).

Multimodality

• Insufficient consideration of public transport and rail capacities in traffic management
  • TMPs should consider the utilisation of alternative modes of transport when capacities are available (see TTIS-DG05: Multimodal Travel Information services).Evaluation

• Knowledge about drivers’ behaviour is still quite limited 
  • Experiences gained from statistical data and monitoring of TMP impacts should be analysed regularly.

Human resources

• The human resources required are hard to estimate, because TMPs often work “on top” of existing measures. With the implementation of a TMP service the work can get more complex for the operator. Normally, organisations are currently not able to provide such a service with the human capacities available to them.
  • Allocation of motivated and well-trained – if necessary additional – staff is essential and often crucial to the success of the service.

4.8.2.4 Distinctiveness to other ITS services

“Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks” is not comparable to other traffic management services described in this handbook. Together with the “TMS-06 Incident Warning and Management service” (see 4.7) it is by its very nature a service that is allocated at the management level which – based on an overarching network strategy – uses and applies other services located on the monitoring and control level with a more local impact. The principle is shown in the Figure 90:

4.8.3 Harmonization requirements and advice

4.8.3.1 ITS service definition

“Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks” means the elaboration, application and quality control of Traffic Management Plans (TMP) for the management of the European network and corridors including multi-modal capacities to allow a more efficient use of the road network in Europe (and not restricting measures to country or local basis).

A TMP is the pre-defined allocation of a set of measures to a specific situation in order to control and guide traffic flows as well as to inform road-users in real-time and provide a consistent and timely service to the road user. Initial situations can be unforeseeable (incidents, accidents) or predictable (recurrent or non-recurrent events). The measures are always applied on a temporary basis.

4.8.3.2 Initial Situations

Initial situations for the application of the Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service are incidents or/and events that negatively affect traffic flow, traffic safety or environment. In the following the situations are listed:

• accidents, road works, adverse weather conditions (thick fog, heavy snow, glace, floods), natural disasters (earthquakes, landslides, overflows)
• strikes, demonstrations,
• major public events, sport events
• exceeding air pollution
• emergencies (such as evacuations of public events, evacuation of ports of airports, closures of tunnels)
• holiday traffic peaks, capacity overload on the road network or of public transport.

A main aspect of incidents is the location, duration and capacity reduction of the incident. A consistent definition of these parameters is essential for effective information and intervention.

4.8.3.3 Types of TMPs

4.8.3.3.1 Overview

Four spatial levels are suited to the elaboration of such complex TMPs:

• Regional TMPs: for networks within areas or regions on the TENT-T that can be extended, under certain conditions, to link with neighbouring regions for cross-regional and cross-border levels.
• Cross-regional TMPs: for national networks and key corridors on the TENT-T, covering multiple regions
• Cross-border TMPs: for cross-border networks and key corridors on the TENT-T and
• TMPs for conurbations: conurbations and the urban/inter-urban expressways network with relevance to long-distance traffic.

4.8.3.3.2 Long-distance TMPs

A pre-defined and co-ordinated strategic traffic management is a proven concept applied all over Europe, in particular on routes with specific complex demands. The most common initial situations are winter problems, a generally high traffic volume, long-lasting road works, emergencies, typical main routes of holiday traffic, cross-border traffic, a close interrelation between long-distance and regional traffic in conurbations, air pollution problems in conurbation areas.

The initial situations are as manifold as the traffic management measures applied:

• In the North-West of Europe re-routing and traveller information measures outweigh. The reason for it is the dense highway network in this area combined with a high traffic volume in relatively small states. Besides, various alternative sea crossing possibilities (such as bridges, tunnels, ferries) require re-routing TMPs in case of bad weather conditions or strikes.
• In some areas as the Alpine regions, re-routing possibilities are limited due to capacity and environment problems on alternative routes and secondary networks. They are only activated in case of extreme incidents as long duration closures requiring regional and cross-border intervention. The issue is to rapidly respond and manage the incident on a local level before it propagates to a major size requiring significant re-routing measures.
• In South Europe, other main aspects are emergencies and weather problems (snow, floods, etc). Here HGV (storage, driving ban, overtaking ban) play a key role (besides re-routing of crossborder traffic).

Great diversity is also seen in organisational and technical aspects. Whereas France has a more or less centralised organisational structure with one entity for the TMP, other countries as Germany are organised on a federal level, all partners are equal in their rights and responsibilities. This decentralised approach is also applied in case of cross-border TMPs.

Different carriers and financing concepts for highways (public, private) have strong impact on investments in technical equipment on highways as well as possibilities and reservations concerning TMPs. In some areas, re-routing involves more than one road operator on the corridor, with traffic police solely responsible for closure and opening of motorways.

Some national guidelines for traffic management exist. They describe the entire process of traffic management, from the initial intent to improve a local traffic situation right up to an integrated traffic management concept. Some of them focus on the evaluation of TMPs. They are applied on a national, regional and local level resulting in a highly structured and user oriented approach of traffic management.

All the named aspects should be harmonised step-by-step on European level. Not with the aim to define one overall valid technical and organisational approach, but with the aim to simplify the connection of existing TMPs along corridors and/or within neighbouring regions, to transfer experiences and to avoid double development work and conflicting strategies.

Objectives for future work on European level concerning TMPs are:

• A stronger link-up of national or regional TMPs and establishing new international TMPs.
• To assist new member states in Eastern Europe establishing appropriate TMPs.
• To strengthen the cooperation between “old” and ‘’new’’ Member States in order to harmonise strategies and establish cross-border TMPs, when needed, between the various regions in Eastern and Western Europe.
• To harmonise international TMP- and system-approaches and structures on a European level.
• To implement a denser network of ITS systems to enhance the efficiency of TMP (VMS, traffic information services, parking areas, etc.).

4.8.3.3.3 TMPs in conurbation areas

TMPs for conurbations are in many regions a relatively different field of work with a different scope of measures ranging from traffic signals, parking, and interurban rerouting to public transport measures in addition to interaction with motorways. First of all they are initiated in case of pre-planned events (sports events etc., or road works) but also unplanned events or recurrent congestion caused by commuter traffic, but also due to air pollution or due to the strong impairment of the conurbation area brought by the long-distance and urban traffic.

There is a need to address the interface between the TEN-T and local feeder and distributor roads in urban areas. Since the quality of traffic flow on the TEN-T can impact and be impacted by the surrounding urban environment, comprehensive TMP’s are required between the relevant urban road and motorway organisations. A number of regions have already the organisation and the technical mechanisms for such a process.

4.8.3.3.4 TMPs for freight transportation

The stakeholders of freight transportation differ completely from those of the strategic traffic management on the European road network and thus the influence of road organisations on this aspect is limited. In the long term they can be influenced through political decisions.

However, four aspects of freight transport belong to the context of Traffic Management Plans, because they affect the road network strongly. They are applied temporarily and they are part of public responsibilities:

• Dynamic ban of driving for HGV / dynamic overtaking ban for HGV
• Dynamic access control for HGV (in the context of passage through sensitive or limited capacity areas as tunnels and mountain passes)
• Dynamic access control for HGV (in the context of air pollution) and
• Temporary HGV storage areas (e.g. temporary hard shoulder usage for HGV storage)

4.8.3.3.5 Multimodality

TMPs have a multimodality aspect if applied measures include actions with the aim of modal shifting of traffic.

• On the cross-border level by multimodality (between road, rail, sea, waterways, air) currently affects only freight transportation (HGV transportation). Measures are applied permanently in order to optimise existing infrastructure capacities or temporarily in case of an incident (TMP).
• In conurbations, the main aspect of multimodality is the combination of road and public transport for individual traffic in case of a predictable or long-lasting incident.
• As in road TMPs, the forecast reliability of the incident is an important element for multimodal TMP elaborations. For predictable incidents, such as congestion due to commuter traffic or fairs, multimodal TMPs can be developed. Spontaneous modal shifting on a large scale, particularly in conurbations, often fails because of lacking capacities of the public transport.

Nevertheless, the increasing traffic demand and the increasing interrelation of transport modes require a very close cooperation between the stakeholders of different transport modes.

4.8.3.4 Functional requirements and advice

4.8.3.4.1 Overview

The entire functionality of Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service can be divided into three different phases which by their nature strongly differ:

• TMP elaboration phase: Generally, the service is a common management task of various organisations involved, not only in combining other different TMS and TIS services, but also with the effects on networks of different authorities. Hence a thorough preparation of the service and documentation by means of intermediate deliverables is a MUST to create and agree upon a clear common understanding between all stakeholders involved
• TMP operation phase: This is the phase where the actual service is provided to the end user
• TMP evaluation phase: Generally, traffic and traffic conditions change rapidly, particularly if end users change their behaviour when confronted with traffic management measures. Hence a thorough analysis of the service impacts and – if necessary – revision of the service organisation is also a MUST and should be undertaken recurrently. The evaluation results must be documented and, in-turn, provide input for improving the service.

Setting up a service Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks normally leads to high costs, not only in the elaboration phase but most importantly regarding operation and evaluation, which are recurrent costs. To prevent incorrect decisions, particularly in the elaboration phase, different process steps must be run through and each concluded with resulting documentation as an intermediate deliverable which then provides decision possibilities for the next step.

The phase concept of the service is depicted in Figure 91:

4.8.3.4.2 TMP elaboration phase

Figure 91 shows the functional architecture of the Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service in the elaboration phase as a generic approach. This model is used to identify where it is appropriate to segment the whole functionality of the service into sub-phases and to provide intermediate deliverables to create and ensure a common understanding between the different parties involved.

Functional requirement:

• FR1: Decomposition of the TMP elaboration phase into sub-phases (process steps) with the provision of intermediate deliverables must be carried out in those cases where the service is carried out by two or more (not closely related) organisations (and decomposition is recommended in any case to be prepared to involve yet further parties as may be the case in the future).

Sub-phase 1 “TMP feasibility study”

Functional requirement:

• FR2: A TMP feasibility study or cost/benefit analysis must be processed and a TMP feasibility document as intermediate deliverable 1 must be delivered as input for the next sub-phase (TMP framework development).

Sub-phase 2 “TMP framework development”

Functional requirement:

• FR3: Based on the input of sub-phase TMP feasibility document (intermediate deliverable 1) a sub-phase TMP framework development must be processed and a TMP framework document as intermediate deliverable 2 must be delivered as input for the next sub-phase (TMP development).

Sub-phase 3 “TMP development”

Note: Concerning the information structure of TMPs different wordings exist in Europe. For the purpose of unambiguous understanding, only the following wording conform to CEN/TS 161578:2019^[1] is used:

• Situation – incidents and/or events which require the application of a TMP
• Scenario – an initial situation caused by unforeseeable incidents/accidents or predictable recurrent or non-recurrent events in combination with a specific response
• Response – a strategy or a single measure to respond to the impact of the initial situation
• Strategy – set of measures appropriate to respond to the impact of the initial situation
• Measure – a possible set of actions to respond to the impact of the initial situation
• Action – one measure can consist of various actions to respond to the impact of the initial situation

Note: in Europe, different methods for detection, verification and reporting of incidents are used.

These methods are not covered by this Reference Handbook. 

Functional requirement:

• FR4: Based on the input of sub-phase TMP framework development (intermediate deliverable 2) a sub-phase TMP scenario development must be processed and a “TMP scenarios publication” as intermediate deliverable 3 must be delivered as input for the next phase (TMP operation).

4.8.3.4.3 TMP operation phase

Figure 96 shows the typical functional architecture of the Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service in the operation phase.

Functional requirement:

• FR5: Functional decomposition of the TMP operation phase into sub-functions with the provision of interfaces must be carried out to ensure interoperability in those cases where the service is carried out by two or more (not closely related) organisations (and functional decomposition is recommended in any case to be prepared to involve yet further parties as may be the case in the future).
• FR6: For the purpose of information exchange between partners and bodies involved in TMPservice a “TMP operation publication” must be generated and published showing the scenario which was selected corresponding to an initial situation and the current status of operation.   

4.8.3.4.4 TMP Evaluation phase

Functional requirements:

• FR7: Important and frequently applied TMPs must be assessed and preferably periodically adjusted and a TMP evaluation document as intermediate deliverable 6 must be delivered as input for a possible necessary improvement of the TMP operation. Hence an evaluation model and an evaluation process must be defined.
• FR8: The TMP evaluation process should compile various sources of information like:
  • Statistical traffic data
  • Experiences of road authorities and operators
  • Survey of incidents with Scenarios (and measures) activated
  • Interviews and questionnaires with operators and road users
  • …

4.8.3.5 Interface requirements

Interface requirements:

• IFR1a: A Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service must provide coded “TMP scenario information” at interface 1 (see Figure 96), including the following elements:
  • The details of proposed traffic management plans, including the scenario for which they are applicable, and the definition of measures and actions that shall be taken as part of the traffic management plan
• IFR1b: A Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service must provide coded “TMP in operation information” at interface 1 (see  Figure 96), including the following elements:
  • Status information and status change information relating to elements of a traffic management plan. The information may relate to a previously defined traffic management plan or a traffic management plan that has not previously been defined.
• IFR2: If interface 2 is implemented, the Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service must provide at interface 2 (see  Figure 96) Traffic Management information coded in C-ITS messages including the following elements:
  • the information and setting of the sign
• IFR3: When relevant, the Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service should collect at interface 3 (see Figure 96) C-ITS coded Probe Vehicle Data information such as travel speed, direction, current location of a vehicle (microscopic traffic situation) relevant to this ITS Core service.

4.8.3.6 Organisational Requirements

4.8.3.6.1 Stakeholder roles to respect and to involve

Organisational requirement:

OR1: All different stakeholder roles needed to be involved in the three phases of the service must be considered and defined (role concept).

Typical TMP-stakeholders-roles are:

Primary Stakeholders (motorway TMPs)

• Road Operators: public/private road organisations and companies in charge of management of road links and networks
• Service Providers: broadcasting companies, public and private traveller information service providers, navigation service providers
• Enforcement: national and regional traffic police
• Emergency Services: fire and emergency services
• Border authorities: customs and border guard
• National and Regional Organisations: Ministries and regional administrations (e.g. ministry of transport, ministry of the interior, ministry of civil works, ministry of environment, ministry of public administrations), national, federal State, regional road organisations and municipalities

Additional primary stakeholders in case of conurbation TMPs:

• Local traffic control centre and other involved departments of cities and municipalities
• Local police / local forces of law and order
• Local public transport organisation
• Car park operators
• Event organisers (e.g. fairs)
• Maritime port and inland port authorities
• Railway authorities
• Airport authorities
• Local press and broadcasting companies

4.8.3.6.2 TMP elaboration phase processes

TMP Feasibility study process

Possible initial situations are:

• Existing (traffic) situations including type, number and distribution of incidents
• Potential emergencies and expected incidents (preventative)
• General (political) objectives

Organisational requirement:

• OR2: For the TMP Feasibility study process the following (or comparable) process steps should be executed:
  • Definition of common policy goals and common interests, consideration of legal bases, regulatory framework
  • Identification and analysis of the influence area (geographic area) which is often variable and dependent on the incident type and duration (capacity reduction) and the affected resource (network capacity)
  • Identification and analysis of bottlenecks, in accordance with the OE-classification (sections of an acceptable route with a traffic capacity substantially below that characterizing other sections of the same route).
  • Inventory of existing (road rail harbour and other) infrastructure (capacity, technical control and equipment packages, communication, topology, traffic ability for different vehicles, planned extensions)
  • Statistical surveys of traffic volumes and speeds (if possible, including aspects of traveller behaviour)Survey of traffic characteristics (share of vehicle types, share of local, regional and long-distance traffic, destination of traffic etc.)
  • Approach for detecting incidents:
    • Preliminary detection of problems / incidents (possible proceedings: interviews with experts, analysis of traffic messages, incident database, calculation of the estimated occupancy, control tours, analysis of system data)
    • Manual / Real-time detection
    • Inventory of existing and planned monitoring systems, control systems and information systems
    • Definition of current, planned and necessary additional technical infrastructure

TMP development process

Organisational requirement:

• OR3: For the TMP development process the following (or comparable) steps should be executed:
  • TMP development
    • Categorisation of incidents, definition of incident thresholds for activation of a TMP
    • Definition of other thresholds / conditions for TMP activation at the local and crossorganisational levels
    • Development of methods for detection / control
    • Location codes and geo-referencing frameworks
    • Development of measures and actions
    • Strategy prioritization in case of overlapping strategies / interests
    • Strategy transitional phases, if needed
    • Thresholds / conditions for activation and deactivation
    • Development of computerised decision support tools such as traffic situation and impact modelling and strategy selection advisor, when necessary
    • Organisational / technical aspects of evaluation / quality management
    • Update and refinement of developed TMPs
    • Formal approval of strategies and measures
    • Set up of organisational structure for full-scale elaboration and monitoring
    • Full-scale elaboration of TMPs
  • TMP validation by stakeholders, piloting refinement
    • Formal approval of strategies and measures
    • Set up of organisational structure for full-scale elaboration and monitoring
    • Field testing of TMPs (if possible)
    • Update and refinement of developed TMPs
    • Full-scale elaboration of applicable TMPs

4.8.3.6.3 TMP regulatory framework

Common Partner Arrangement / Memorandum of Understanding (MoU)

Clear definitions of organisational aspects are a crucial precondition for the successful implementation of a TMP service and should be documented and agreed upon by all involved parties/partners in the form of a Common Partner Arrangement / MoU which fixes the co-operation.

However, due to the fact that the partners are public or private road organisations who are legally autonomous to varying degrees and, in the international context, sometimes even work on different national laws, it is not required to define organisational aspects on a legal and binding basis.

The documents should define the modes of co-operation and must contain operation instructions for the afore-mentioned aspects. Thus, they should be thoroughly verified before signature. Both documents are a declaration of intent to fulfil them but are not legally binding. The appointment should be concluded in written form, on the one hand because it requires a clear common understanding of the cooperation and on the other hand because the signing of the contract can be seen as a milestone with media impact. For an example, see Annex B.

As content of the Common Partner Arrangement / MoU rules of procedure should be determined answering the following questions: 

• Who are the points of contact within the participating TCCs?
• What media (incl. fall back) is used for systems for scenario / strategy co-ordination?
• Which language is used for scenario / strategy co-ordination?
• Who is allowed (and bound) to request a strategy under which conditions?
• What degree of flexibility is allowed under each pre-defined strategy?
• Who is allowed to accept or reject the strategy?
• How to proceed if one partner does not agree the strategy activation?
• How to proceed if one partner does not answer? (time-out procedure)
• Do the partners have to justify their decision?
• Is it desired that partners get insight into the traffic situation of each other?
• How to proceed if the traffic management centres have different operation times (e.g. during the night)?
• Which strategy has priority in case of overlapping activations?

Through a detailed technical annex the Common Partner Arrangement / MoU should contain the list of scenarios, activation and de-activation thresholds, organisational structure, communication templates, operating protocols, etc., to be evaluated and updated on a regular basis.

Organisational requirement:

• OR4: For the successful implementation of a “Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service” all necessary organisational aspects should be documented and agreed by all involved parties/partners to fix the co-operation

Organisational advice:

• Preceding the finalisation of the documents and the agreement upon the co-operation extensive off-line and on-line testing of proposed TM strategies and measures should be executed to refine and validate the process, prior to agreeing a formal long-standing process.

Public-private partnerships

A new challenge is the ever-increasing number of public-private partnerships in the field of traffic management. Here, where private stakeholders execute sovereign tasks or receive data, binding contracts should be developed and signed. Another relevant aspect is the use of privately generated data for traffic management. A contract (with service level agreement) should be a MUST wherever the TMP relies on receiving privately generated data.

Organisational requirement:

• OR5: In the case of involving private partners for the delivery of privately generated data for a Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service, a service level agreement should be developed and closed wherever a TMP relies on receiving privately generated data

4.8.3.6.4 Forms of service operational organisation

Different organisational structure principles exist to manage the service operation:

Centralised operational organisational structure

In this structure, the coordinator is obliged to decide about the activation and deactivation of the TMP. According to specific conditions, the partner has to carry out the actions under his command.

Decentralised operational organisational structure

In this organisational structure, TMPs are applied in close collaboration between legally autonomous partners. The scenario is requested from the partner affected by the incident. It can be accepted or rejected from every collaboration partner with varying rights according to the MoU agreement.

Mixture of centralised and decentralised operational organisational structure

Several organisations involved are structured differently at various levels of event information and TMP activation / deactivation communication. This also includes special forms of organisations in which private parties are contractually included to manage TMPs.

Organisational requirement:

• OR6: Stakeholders involved in service operation must agree on one of the following operational organisational structures:
  • centralized structure
  • decentralized structure
  • mixture of centralised and decentralised structure

4.8.3.7 Common Look & Feel requirements and advice

TMP elaboration document structure

Common Look & Feel requirement:

• CL&FR1: In order to facilitate the comprehension of TMP documents between various bodies they should respect the common structure of the TMP framework document (intermediate deliverable 2), called TMP Fact Sheet (see Table 44 and Table 45):

Table 40: Traffic Management Plan – Fact Sheet (Example URSA MAJOR, page 1)

Table 41:  Traffic Management Plan – Fact Sheet (Example URSA MAJOR, page 2)

4.8.3.8 ICT Infrastructure requirements

No specific requirements or advice.

4.8.3.9 Required standards and specifications

Information provision standards:

• IPS1a: If the Traffic Management service for Corridors and Networks provides TMP scenarios at interface 1 (see IFR1a), they must be profiled based on CEN/TS 16157-8:2020 (DATEX II).
• IPS1b: If the Traffic Management service for Corridors and Networks provides TMP’S in operation at interface 1 (see IPR1b), they must be profiled based on CEN/TS 16157-8:2020 (DATEX II).
• IPS2: If interface 2 is implemented Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks information (see IFR2) must be profiled using an IVIM based on ISO 19321 using the C-ROADS C-ITS Message Profiles for the In-Vehicle Signage service.
• IPS3: When relevant, the Probe Vehicle Data (microscopic traffic situation) information (see IFR3) should be collected, which is profiled based on ETSI EN 302 637-2 using the CAR2CAR Communication Consortium Basic System Profile.

4.8.3.10 Level of Service Definition

4.8.3.10.1 Level of Service Criteria

Table 42 gives the Level of Service recommendations for a Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks service. The background of this concept is descripted in chapter 2.6. Table 42: Level of Service recommendations for Traffic Management for Corridors and  Networks.

Table 42: Level of Service recommendations for Traffic Management for Corridors and  Networks

4.8.3.10.2 Level of Service Criteria related to Operating Environment

LoS requirement:

• LoSR1: In the case that pre-deployment surveys / evaluations provide the necessary evidence to proceed with the deployment of the ITS-service “Traffic Management for Corridors and Networks”, the minimum and optimum LoS should respect the following Level of Service to Operating Environment mapping table.

Table 43: Level of Service to Operating Environment mapping table (see also chapter  2.5.3 and ANNEX C)

[1] (Intelligent transport systems – DATEX II data exchange specifications for traffic management and information – Part 8: Traffic management publications and extensions dedicated to the urban environment, „TmplanTAblePublication“ class model)

---

[1] https://tm20.org/