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.
Section 6. Development of the Guide to Traffic Control of Rural Routes in an Agricultural Emergency The guide was developed in three steps: ⢠Develop initial draft guide ⢠Review the initial draft guide with local, state and federal representatives ⢠Revise the guide and submit it as part of the final report This section describes the development of the initial draft guide and Section 7 discusses the review with local, state, and federal representatives. 6.1 Develop Initial Draft Guide The contacts with state and local agencies revealed that there is little guidance available for local law enforcement agencies concerning traffic control in quarantine or stop movement emergencies. Of greater concern is the fact that many sheriffs have little appreciation of the size and complexity of this effort, which is almost universally assigned to local law enforcement. Therefore, we are convinced that furnishing a guide for local officials is very necessary and critical to our nationâs security. An effective guide will allow local officials to plan and perform traffic control in an agricultural emergency. The guide is written in simple everyday language in a manner that answers traffic control questions for local officials. Although the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices was used in preparing the guide, we did not assume that all users are familiar with the provisions of the manual. The final guide has been published as NCHRP Report 525 Volume 13: A Guide to Traffic Control of Rural Roads in an Agricultural Emergency and is to be used by local and state officials that are responsible for traffic control during an agricultural emergency. It may also be possible to use the guide as an annex or appendix to a countyâs LEOP. The guide discusses planning for an agricultural emergency, information needed to prioritize roads, the process of determining the level of traffic control for each road that crosses the quarantine boundary, and typical layouts for each type of road closure or stop. The guide discusses traffic control in the three phases shown in the taxonomy in Section 5. In the planning phases, the recommended command structure used for the Operations Section, where the responsibilities for quarantine enforcement are held, is presented in Figure 3 below. This example was taken from the Kansas example shown in Section 5, but includes a third branch for Traffic Flow Management. This branch is specific to the operations, rather than the enforcement, side of traffic control and includes 51
52 responsibilities such as monitoring queues at traffic stops and checkpoints, monitoring the condition of detour routes, and managing sign installation and maintenance. These responsibilities would likely be carried out by a state DOT or local public works engineer who would supervise DOT and public works maintenance crews. Figure 2. Suggested Additional Branch in Operations Section for Agricultural Emergency Response The process of determining the level of traffic control during the second phase of an agricultural emergency is illustrated using a hypothetical example scenario. This hypothetical scenario simulates a FAD outbreak on a small farm about 6 mi (10 km) southeast of Linn, Missouri, which is about 20 mi (32 km) east of Jefferson City, the state capitol. Response Planning for Hypothetical Scenario The Guide explains how to prioritize the roads and choose the level of traffic control. Based on the findings from our study, several key officials from varying agencies must work together to determine the level of traffic control at each site or traffic control point. Diverted Livestock Receiving Livestock Cleaning and Disinfection Euthanasia and Disposal Detour Planning Traffi Diverted Livestock Receiving Livestock Cleaning and Disinfection Euthanasia and Disposal Detour Planning Traffic Monitoring Traffic Control Device Group Pavement Management Group Traffic Checkpoint Vehicle Inspection Traffic surveillance Operations Section Quarantine Enforcement Branch Traffic Control Branch Disease Control Branch Movement Control Group c Traffic Control Device Group Pavement Management Group Traffic Checkpoint Vehicle Inspection Traffic surveillance Operations Section Quarantine Enforcement Branch Traffic Control Branch Disease Control Branch Movement Control Group i i Traffic Monitoring t t  i i i r i i i l I ti i i l f t l
These officials would include the FADD, a public health officer, the county emergency manager, the county sheriff, the county public works director and the area DOT engineer. In this example, major routes would require check point traffic control to screen the large number of vehicles traveling through the quarantine area. Predetermined detours would be instituted to divert traffic to alternate routes. Trucks with animals traveling in the quarantine zone would be sent to holding sites, trucks with animals coming to the quarantine area would be turned around to avoid the infection site. One site on a major route includes a disinfection station to disinfect vehicles leaving the quarantine area. The crossing of other state routes would also have a traffic check, and animals going to the feed lot would be sent to a holding point. Animals coming from the feed lot would be sent back to the lot. This site would include a disinfection station as additional resources became available. The state area engineer would be asked to furnish traffic control for the US and MO route traffic control points and the Missouri Highway Patrol would be asked to provide law enforcement officers. Initially all other roads would be blocked. Three of the roads could have an auxiliary deputy or volunteer, but the additional road blocks would be unmanned by law enforcement personnel. Some of the road blocks could be eliminated by considering the road network. The Phase 2 response, which occurs between the FADDâs preliminary diagnosis and confirmation from the USDA authorized laboratory, will produce a map showing the level of traffic control for each road crossed by the boundary line. The traffic control layouts will show the traffic control devices and personnel required at each TC point. The guide discusses the priority of installing the traffic control devices and how the point of road closure should be chosen. For example, roads should be closed near intersections to allow people to select alternate routes without turning around. At least one advanced warning sign should be in place if a road is blocked. The Guide lists the required devices and personnel for each type of TC point. Local officials can compare these requirements with the inventories of traffic control devices. If there are shortfalls in available devices, then other agencies will need to be contacted or other non-standard devices will need to be used for some TC points. Non-standard materials such as hay bales should be used on low priority routes saving standard devices for higher volume closures or for level 1 or 2 traffic control points. Plastic fence or other farm materials can be used for barricades, but should be replaced when standard devices are available. Early in Phase 3, which goes into effect after a confirmation of a FAD is received from the USDA authorized laboratory, a vehicle with a yellow flashing light may be used to block roads until closure traffic control devices are available. Signs should be specific to this type of hazard (Biohazard signs) but can be purchased as rollup or fabric signs. It may also be necessary to post public information sheets at each road closure to warn drivers of the hazard of proceeding into the quarantined area. Some signs should probably be purchased and stored as part of Phase 1 planning, and public information sheets can be made in Phase 2 response. The typical layouts for the traffic check points and the disinfection stations include notes which specify the equipment that will be at the TC point for control of traffic. Nebraska Department of Agricultureâs âMonograph 001: Traffic Controlâ (included in Section 2.5 of the annotated bibliography) is the only document found by the research 53
54 team that specifically address traffic control in an agriculture quarantine. The personnel and equipment sections of this document were especially helpful in developing notes for the traffic control diagrams in the guide. Because of the small size of law enforcement staff in rural counties, the guide does not recommend that the county furnish an officer for each TC point. Also, the extensive equipment listed in the Nebraska monograph will not be available, at least initially, for each control point. Again, the guide discusses how to prioritize the personnel and equipment used at a site, since some roads will need to be blocked without law enforcement personnel present. Overall, our goal was to keep the guide as short and as easily understood and followed by law enforcement and first responder personnel as possible, emphasizing the traffic control features of the response. The guide avoids or minimizes discussions of legal basis of quarantines, law enforcement standard operating guidelines at traffic stops, specifics of cleaning and disinfection operations and reimbursement and indemnity procedures. These are difficult issues that vary by state and infection type and that should be discussed elsewhere. The guide was developed in draft form. This draft guide was reviewed by state and local officials as described in Section 7. The NCHRP project panel also reviewed and commented on the initial draft guide at this stage. The initial draft guide was revised in response to all comments received from state and local officials and from the NCHRP project panel and is has been published as NCHRP Report 525 Volume 13: A Guide to Traffic Control of Rural Roads in an Agricultural Emergency.