Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
4The provision of traffic law enforcement at a highway work zone is recognized as one of the most effective means avail- able for reducing speeding, speed variability, and undesirable driving behaviors such as tailgating and unsafe lane changes, thereby improving traffic and worker safety in the work zone. The presence of work zone enforcement is also believed to raise driver awareness and level of alertness, reducing perception- reaction times in response to unexpected hazards encountered. As was noted in the Final Rule creating a new Subpart K to 23 CFR Part 630, Temporary Traffic Control Devices (1): âA number of conditions may indicate the need for or ben- efit of uniformed law enforcement in work zones. In general, the need for law enforcement is greatest on projects with high traf- fic speeds and volumes, and where the work zone is expected to result in substantial disruption to or changes in normal traffic flow patterns. Specific project conditions should be examined to determine the need for or potential benefit of law enforcement, such as the following: (i) Frequent worker presence adjacent to high-speed traffic without positive protection devices; (ii) Traffic control setup or removal that presents significant risks to workers and road users; (iii) Complex or very short term changes in traffic patterns with significant potential for road user confusion or worker risk from traffic exposure; (iv) Night work operations that create substantial traffic safety risks for workers and road users; (v) Existing traffic conditions and crash histories that indicate a potential for substantial safety and congestion impacts related to the work zone activity, and that may be mitigated by improved driver behavior and awareness of the work zone; (vi) Work zone operations that require brief stoppage of all traffic in one or both directions; (vii) High-speed roadways where unexpected or sudden traf- fic queuing is anticipated, especially if the queue forms a con- siderable distance in advance of the work zone or immediately adjacent to the work space; and (viii) Other work site conditions where traffic presents a high risk for workers and road users, such that the risk may be reduced by improving road user behavior and awareness.â As a result of this federal rulemaking, all state highway agencies must have a policy in place regarding the use of law enforcement in work zones (see Figure 1). Requirements per- taining to reimbursement of enforcement costs are also out- lined in federal regulations (see Figure 2). While the regulation does identify a number of topics that agencies need to address in their policies, it does not describe how to address those topics. Rather, each agency is left to decide how best to fund, administer, and implement traffic law enforcement efforts in work zones under its jurisdiction. As part of the development process, agencies must consider a number of basic staffing and implementation questions, such as: ⢠When and where should law enforcement be used? ⢠How much enforcement should be used? ⢠What type(s) of enforcement strategies should be used? ⢠How should the enforcement efforts be paid for? ⢠How should the use of enforcement in work zone be moni- tored and administered? ⢠How should the effectiveness of enforcement be measured, and how much benefit is achieved? In addition to answering these questions, agencies must also decide how to best design and manage their work zones so as to maximize the effectiveness of law enforcement when it is used. This includes consideration and implementation of the following: ⢠Work zone design features that best accommodate enforce- ment activities; ⢠Selection and implementation of appropriate alternatives and/or supplements to enforcement (speed display trailers, portable changeable message signs, etc.); and ⢠Appropriate public awareness techniques to complement work zone enforcement efforts. C h a p t e r 1 Introduction
5 Figure 1. Federal work zone law enforcement policy requirements. Uniformed Law Enforcement Policy in Work Zones 23 CFR Part 630 Subpart K 630.1106 (c) Each agency, in partnership with the FHWA, shall develop a policy addressing the use of uniformed law enforcement on Federal-aid highway projects. The policy may consist of processes, procedures, and/or guidance. The processes, procedures, and/or guidance should address the following: (1) Basic interagency agreements between the highway agency and appropriate law enforcement agencies to address work zone enforcement needs; (2) Interaction between highway and law-enforcement agency during project planning and development; (3) Conditions where law enforcement involvement in work zone traffic control may be needed or beneficial, and criteria to determine the project-specific need for law enforcement; (4) General nature of law enforcement services to be provided, and procedures to determine project-specific services; (5) Appropriate work zone safety and mobility training for the officers, consistent with the training requirements in 23 CFR 630.1008(d); (6) Procedures for interagency and project-level communications between highway agency and law enforcement personnel; and (7) Reimbursement agreements for law enforcement service. Figure 2. Federal work zone law enforcement reimbursement requirements. Reimbursement for Uniformed Law Enforcement Officers 23 CFR Part 630 Subpart K 630.1108 (d) (2) Costs associated with the provision of uniformed law enforcement to help protect workers and road users, and to maintain safe and efficient travel through highway work zones, are eligible for Federal- aid participation. Federal-aid eligibility excludes law enforcement activities that would normally be expected in and around highway problem areas requiring routine or ongoing law enforcement traffic control and enforcement activities. Payment for the services of uniformed law enforcement in work zones may be included in the construction contract, or be provided by direct reimbursement from the highway agency to the law enforcement agency. When payment is included through the construction contract, the contractor will be responsible for reimbursing the law enforcement agency, and in turn will recover those costs through contract pay items. Direct interagency reimbursement may be made on a project-specific basis, or on a program-wide basis that considers the overall level of services to be provided by the law enforcement agency. Contract pay items for law enforcement service may be either unit price or lump sum items. Unit price items should be utilized when the highway agency can estimate and control the quantity of law enforcement services required on the project. The use of lump sum payment should be limited to situations where the quantity of services is directly affected by the contractor's choice of project scheduling and chosen manner of staging and performing the work. Innovative payment items may also be considered when they offer an advantage to both the highway agency and the contractor. When reimbursement to the law enforcement agency is made by interagency transfer of funds, the highway agency should establish a program-level or project-level budget that is adequate to meet anticipated program or project needs, and include provisions to address unplanned needs and other contingencies. The guidelines presented in this document are intended to aid agencies in answering these and other questions in estab- lishing an effective, holistic approach to work zone enforce- ment efforts that are consistent with each agencyâs goals and constraints. The following topics are covered in these guidelines: ⢠Traffic Enforcement Strategies for Various Work Zone Situations, ⢠Enforcement Considerations in Work Zone Planning and Design, and ⢠Administrative Considerations of Work Zone Traffic Enforcement.
