Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter.
Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.
OCR for page 52
Volume II: Guide for Performance Measure Identification and Target Setting
Appendix B. Example State DOT
Performance Targets
This appendix contains sample performance targets documented for illustrative purposes that were
established at some point in time by each of the referenced states; they are not necessarily current
and are likely to change over time.
Table B.1 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Pavement Preservation
Measure Description State Target
Distress Rating 0100 scale based on roughness, Alabama 75
cracking, rutting, patching, raveling
Highway Adequacy 0100 scale based on pavement Maine
condition rating, safety, backlog, Overall--60
average daily traffic, posted speed, and
shoulder
International Index based on vehicle response to Federal 93% 170
Roughness Index roughness (lower = smoother)
Louisiana 170
(IRI)
Nevada I--70% <80
II--65% <80
III--60% <80
IV--40% <80
V--10% <80
Pennsylvania 94
Maintenance 15 scale based on pavement, traffic Texas Interstate 80%
Assessment Program operations and roadside Other 75%
Maintenance Rating 1100 scale based on pavement, shoul- Tennessee Overall 75
Index ders, roadside elements, drainage, and
traffic services
Nebraska 0100 scale based on surface Nebraska Overall 72%
Serviceability Index distresses--cracking, patching,
roughness, rutting, faulting
Overall Pavement 05 scale based on pavement distress Delaware 15% Poor
Condition
Pavement Condition Good, fair, and poor based on pave- Kentucky 30% Poor
Index ment smoothness
Pavement Condition 1100 scale based on cracking, pot- Ohio Priority 75% 65
Rating holes, deterioration, and other Other 75% 55
(continued on next page)
B-1
OCR for page 53
Volume II: Guide for Performance Measure Identification and Target Setting
Table B.1 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets (continued)
Pavement Preservation
Measure Description State Target
Pavement Condition 010 scale for pavement segments Florida 80% >6 for all 3 criteria
Survey based on ride smoothness, pavement
cracking, and rutting
Pavement Quality 0100 scale based on 3 surface distress Indiana Interstate--75
Index factors NHS--75
Other--65
Pavement Quality 0.04.5 scale based on smoothness and Minnesota Principal 3.0
Index distress (cracking) Other 2.8
Pavement 05 scale based on ride, rutting, and Wyoming NHS--3.5
Serviceability Rating cracking Other--3.0
Performance Levels PL-1: good condition; PL-2: requires Kansas Interstate 80% PL1
maintenance; PL-3: poor condition Other 75% PL1
Present Serviceability 05 scale based on subjective rating by Arizona 3.23
Rating road users
Remaining Service Poor (05 years), fair (610 years), or Colorado Interstate 80%
Life good (11+ years) based on surface NHS 70%
distress Other 55%
Ride Index 15 scale based on vehicle response to Utah 50% 2.75
roughness with adjustment for pave- 15% 1.84
ment type
Roughness Index and Roughness index--0.0 to 5.0 based on Idaho 18% <2.5
Cracking Index public perception
Cracking index--0.0 to 5.0 for each
pavement section
Sufficiency Rating Excellent, good, fair, poor, very poor, Michigan 30% Poor or Very Poor
based on surface distresses
B-2
OCR for page 54
Volume II: Guide for Performance Measure Identification and Target Setting
Table B.2 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Structure Preservation
Measure Description State Target
Bridge Value Index Ratio of current value to replacement Oregon 8790%
value
GASB 34 Bridge 010 scale assigned to each component- Alabama 5
Rating rating category
Health Index 0100 scale based on condition of sev- Kansas Overall 80
eral elements
NBI Appraisal 09 scale based on deck, substructure, Ohio 85% of deck area 5
Ratings and superstructure condition Delaware 75% 6
<10% 4
Washington 95% Good or Fair
Number of Closed Bridges closed Pennsylvania Reduce by 50% by 2010
Bridges
Number of Posted Bridges with weight restrictions Oregon 0
Bridges
Pennsylvania Reduce by 30% by 2010
Structural Condition Good, fair, or poor based on National Minnesota Principal--92% Fair to Good
Rating Bridge Inventory (NBI) condition and Other--80% Fair to Good
appraisal ratings
Structurally Deficient SD--FHWA rating that indicates a Colorado 25% SD
(SD) or Functionally bridge is restricted to light vehicles,
Federal <20% of NHS either SD or
Obsolete (FO) requires immediate rehabilitation to FO
remain open, or is closed
Florida 90% 5 SD
FO--FHWA-defined rating based on
deck geometry, load-carrying capacity, Georgia <5% (based on deck area)
clearance, and approach roadway
alignment Kentucky 7% SD
Michigan 35% SD
Tennessee >75% neither SD nor FO
Wisconsin 15% SD
Structures Inventory 1100 scale based on condition of major Utah 50% 80
System elements 15% 49
Sufficiency Rating 0100 scale based on 4 factors reflecting Indiana Interstate--87%
ability to remain in service NHS--85%
Other--83%
Maine Overall--60%
Wyoming NHS--83%
Other--80%
B-3
OCR for page 55
Volume II: Guide for Performance Measure Identification and Target Setting
Table B.3 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Operational Efficiency
Measure Description State Target
Toll Operations Costs Operational costs per toll transaction Florida <$0.16
Incident Clearance Average clearance time for incidents on Minnesota 35 minutes
Time the Twin Cities urban freeway system
that occur between 6:00 a.m. and
7:00 p.m. on weekdays
and
Monthly incidents with clearance times Washington 0
over 90 minutes
Snow and Ice Average time required to provide bare Minnesota 25 hours
Removal Time pavement on super commuter routes
following a weather incident
Table B.4 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Capacity Expansion
Measure Description State Target
Congestion Percent of urban freeway miles in Minnesota
21%
regional trade centers that are moder-
ately congested (02 hours of speeds
below 45 mph)
Level of Service Describes operating condition in terms Washington D for urban areas and C for
of speed, travel time, and safety rural areas
Traffic Density Annual percent growth in vehicles per Florida <4%
mile on Interstate
and
Freeways with annual ADT (AADT) Maryland <32%
greater than 20,000 vehicles per lane
Travel speeds Percent of interregional corridor miles Minnesota 90% by 2020
where travel speeds met or exceed
minimum levels
B-4
OCR for page 56
Volume II: Guide for Performance Measure Identification and Target Setting
Table B.5 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Safety
Measure Description State Target
Correctable Crash Number of correctable crash sites Montana Improve over time
Sites Improved funded for improvement
Crash Rate 3-year average rate per million VMT Minnesota 0.73
Fatal and Disabling Percent decrease in number of fatal and Washington Decrease over previous
Crashes disabling crashes since 1990 year
Fatalities 3-year average Minnesota 550 (3-year average)
Pennsylvania Reduce by 10% by 2010
Fatality Rate 5-year fatality rate (fatalities per 100 Idaho 1.8
million VMT)
Injury Rate 5-year serious injury rate (serious inju- Idaho 10.22
ries per 100 million VMT)
Road Condition Percent of crashes on strategic highway Florida <1%
Related Crashes system where road-related conditions
are a contributing factor
Table B.6 Examples of State DOT Performance Targets
Transportation Environmental Impacts
Measure Description State Target
NOx Emissions Transportation-related VOC emissions Maryland <33.9%
as a percent of total VOC emissions
VOC Emissions Transportation-related VOC emissions Maryland <40.2%
as a percent of total VOC emissions
Impacted Wetlands Ratio of acres of wetlands replaced to Minnesota 1
Replaced acres impacted
B-5
