Governor's Office of Drug Control Policy Five-Year Strategic Plan, July 1, 2013-June 30, 2018

The Office of the Drug Policy Coordinator is established in Chapter 80E of the Code of Iowa. The Coordinator directs the Governor’s Office of Drug Control Policy; coordinates and monitors all statewide counter-drug efforts, substance abuse treatment grants and programs, and substance abuse prevention and education programs; and engages in other related activities involving the Departments of public safety, corrections, education, public health, and human services. The coordinator assists in the development of local and community strategies to fight substance abuse, including local law enforcement, education, and treatment activities. The Drug Policy Coordinator serves as chairperson to the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The council includes the directors of the departments of corrections, education, public health, public safety, human services, division of criminal and juvenile justice planning, and human rights. The Council also consists of a prosecuting attorney, substance abuse treatment specialist, substance abuse prevention specialist, substance abuse treatment program director, judge, and one representative each from the Iowa Association of Chiefs of Police and Peace Officers, the Iowa State Police Association, and the Iowa State Sheriff’s and Deputies’ Association. Council members are appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Senate. The council makes policy recommendations related to substance abuse education, prevention, and treatment, and drug enforcement. The Council and the Coordinator oversee the development and implementation of a comprehensive State of Iowa Drug Control Strategy. The Office of Drug Control Policy administers federal grant programs to improve the criminal justice system by supporting drug enforcement, substance abuse prevention and offender treatment programs across the state. The ODCP prepares and submits the Iowa Drug and Violent Crime Control Strategy to the U.S. Department of Justice, with recommendations from the Drug Policy Advisory Council. The ODCP also provides program and fiscal technical assistance to state and local agencies, as well as program evaluation and grants management.

Mission-Oriented Dust Control and Surface Improvement Processes for Unpaved Roads, HR-194, 1981

Six subject areas prompted the broad field of inquiry of this mission-oriented dust control and surface improvement project for unpaved roads: • DUST--Hundreds of thousands of tons of dust are created annually by vehicles on Iowa's 70,000 miles of unpaved roads and streets. Such dust is often regarded as a nuisance by Iowa's highway engineers. • REGULATIONS--Establishment of "fugitive dust" regulations by the Iowa DEQ in 1971 has created debates, conferences, legal opinions, financial responsibilities, and limited compromises regarding "reasonable precaution" and "ordinary travel," both terms being undefined judgment factors. • THE PUBLIC--Increased awareness by the public that regulations regarding dust do in fact exist creates a discord of telephone calls, petitions, and increasing numbers of legal citations. Both engineers and politicians are frustrated into allowing either the courts or regulatory agencies to resolve what is basically a professional engineering responsibility. • COST--Economics seldom appear as a tenet of regulatory strategies, and in the case of "fugitive dust," four-way struggles often occur between the highway professions, political bodies, regulatory agencies, and the general public as to who is responsible, what can be done, how much it will cost, or why it wasn't done yesterday. • CONFUSION--The engineer lacks authority, and guidelines and specifications to design and construct a low-cost surf acing system are nebulous, i.e., construct something between the present crushed stone/gravel surface and a high-type pavement. • SOLUTION--The engineer must demonstrate that dust control and surface improvement may be engineered at a reasonable cost to the public, so that a higher degree of regulatory responsibility can be vested in engineering solutions.

Iowa DOT Evaluation of the PASCO Road Survey System, HR-539, 1987

The report compares and contrasts the automated PASCO method of pavement evaluation to the manual procedures used by the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) to evaluate pavement condition. Iowa DOT's use of IJK and BPR roadmeters and manual crack and patch surveys are compared to PASCO's use of 35-mm photography, artificial lighting and hairline projection, tracking wheels and lasers to measure ride, cracking and patching, rut depths, and roughness. The Iowa DOT method provides a Present Serviceability Index (PSI) value and PASCO provides a Maintenance Control Index (MCI). Seven sections of Interstate Highway, county roads and city streets, and one shoulder section were tested with different speeds of data collection, surface types and textures, and stop and start conditions. High correlation of results between the two methods in the measurement of roughness (0.93 for the tracking wheel and 0.84 for the laser method) were recorded. Rut depth correlations of 0.61 and cracking of 0.32 are attributed to PASCO's more comprehensive measurement techniques. A cost analysis of the data provided by both systems indicates that PASCO is capable of providing a comparable result with improved accuracy at a cost of $125-$150 or less per two-lane mile depending on survey mileage. Improved data collection speed, accuracy, and reliability, and a visible record of pavement condition for comparable costs are available. The PASCO system's ability to provide the data required in the Highway Pavement Distress Identification Manual, the Pavement Condition Rating Guide, and the Strategic Highway Research Program Long Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Studies, is also outlined in the report.

Evaluation of the PAVEDEX Road Survey System in Iowa, HR-547, 1990

The Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) evaluated the PAS I Road Survey System from PAVEDEX, Inc. of Spokane, Washington. This system uses video photograph to identify and quantify pavement cracking and patching distresses. Comparisons were made to procedures currently used in the State. Interstate highway, county roads and city streets, and two shoulder sections were evaluated. Variables included travel speeds, surface type and texture, and traffic control conditions. Repeatability and distress identification were excellent on rigid pavements. Differences in distress identification and the effect of surface textures in the flexible test sections limited the repeatability and correlation of data to that of the Iowa DOT method. Cost data indicates that PAVEDEX is capable of providing comparable results with improved accuracy at a reasonable cost, but in excess of that experienced currently by the Iowa DOT. PAVEDEX is capable of providing network level pavement condition data at highway speeds and analysis of the data to identify 1/8-inch cracks at approximately 2-3 lane miles per hour with manual evaluation. Photo-logging capability is also included in the unit.

Guidelines for Removal of Traffic Control Devices in Rural Areas, TR-527, 2005

It is commonly regarded that the overuse of traffic control devices desensitizes drivers and leads to disrespect, especially for low-volume secondary roads with limited enforcement. The maintenance of traffic signs is also a tort liability concern, exacerbated by unnecessary signs. The Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA) Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) and the Institute of Transportation Engineer’s (ITE) Traffic Control Devices Handbook provide guidance for the implementation of STOP signs based on expected compliance with right-of-way rules, provision of through traffic flow, context (proximity to other controlled intersections), speed, sight distance, and crash history. The approach(es) to stop is left to engineering judgment and is usually dependent on traffic volume or functional class/continuity of system. Although presently being considered by the National Committee on Traffic Control Devices, traffic volume itself is not given as a criterion for implementation in the MUTCD. STOP signs have been installed at many locations for various reasons which no longer (or perhaps never) met engineering needs. If in fact the presence of STOP signs does not increase safety, removal should be considered. To date, however, no guidance exists for the removal of STOP signs at two-way stop-controlled intersections. The scope of this research is ultra-low-volume (< 150 daily entering vehicles) unpaved intersections in rural agricultural areas of Iowa, where each of the 99 counties may have as many as 300 or more STOP sign pairs. Overall safety performance is examined as a function of a county excessive use factor, developed specifically for this study and based on various volume ranges and terrain as a proxy for sight distance. Four conclusions are supported: (1) there is no statistical difference in the safety performance of ultra-low-volume stop-controlled and uncontrolled intersections for all drivers or for younger and older drivers (although interestingly, older drivers are underrepresented at both types of intersections); (2) compliance with stop control (as indicated by crash performance) does not appear to be affected by the use or excessive use of STOP signs, even when adjusted for volume and a sight distance proxy; (3) crash performance does not appear to be improved by the liberal use of stop control; (4) safety performance of uncontrolled intersections appears to decline relative to stop-controlled intersections above about 150 daily entering vehicles. Subject to adequate sight distance, traffic professionals may wish to consider removal of control below this threshold. The report concludes with a section on methods and legal considerations for safe removal of stop control.

Implementation of a Pilot Continuous Monitoring System: Iowa Falls Arch Bridge, HR-1088, 2015

The goal of this work was to move structural health monitoring (SHM) one step closer to being ready for mainstream use by the Iowa Department of Transportation (DOT) Office of Bridges and Structures. To meet this goal, the objective of this project was to implement a pilot multi-sensor continuous monitoring system on the Iowa Falls Arch Bridge such that autonomous data analysis, storage, and retrieval can be demonstrated. The challenge with this work was to develop the open channels for communication, coordination, and cooperation of various Iowa DOT offices that could make use of the data. In a way, the end product was to be something akin to a control system that would allow for real-time evaluation of the operational condition of a monitored bridge. Development and finalization of general hardware and software components for a bridge SHM system were investigated and completed. This development and finalization was framed around the demonstration installation on the Iowa Falls Arch Bridge. The hardware system focused on using off-the-shelf sensors that could be read in either “fast” or “slow” modes depending on the desired monitoring metric. As hoped, the installed system operated with very few problems. In terms of communications—in part due to the anticipated installation on the I-74 bridge over the Mississippi River—a hardline digital subscriber line (DSL) internet connection and grid power were used. During operation, this system would transmit data to a central server location where the data would be processed and then archived for future retrieval and use. The pilot monitoring system was developed for general performance evaluation purposes (construction, structural, environmental, etc.) such that it could be easily adapted to the Iowa DOT’s bridges and other monitoring needs. The system was developed allowing easy access to near real-time data in a format usable to Iowa DOT engineers.