Click for next page ( 43

The National Academies | 500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001
Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

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 42
42 References 1. McCormick, C.R. Make Liquidated Damages Work. AACE Inter- 18. Martin, P., Stevanovic, A., and Disegni, R. User Costs on the I-15 national 2003 Annual Meeting, CDR151-CDR157, Orlando, FL. Design-Build Reconstruction, Report No. UT-03.23. Civil & Envi- 2. American Association of State Highway and Transportation. Primer ronmental Engineering Department, University of Utah, Salt Lake on Contracting: For the Twenty-First Century, 2006: A Report of the City, 2003. Contract Administration Task Force of the AASHTO Subcommittee 19. Bryden, J.E., and Mace, D.J. NCHRP Report 475: A Procedure for on Construction, 5th ed. Washington, DC, 2005. Assessing and Planning Nighttime Highway Construction and Mainte- 3. Florida Department of Transportation. Innovative and Alternative nance. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2002. Contracting Practices. Tallahassee, 1996. 20. Bryden, J.E., and Mace, D.J. NCHRP Report 476: Guidelines for 4. Anderson, S.D., and Russell, J.S. NCHRP Report 451: Guidelines for Design and Operation of Nighttime Traffic Control for Highway Warranty, Multi-Parameter, and Best Value Contracting. TRB, Maintenance and Construction. TRB, National Research Council, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2001. Washington, DC, 2002. 5. Florida Department of Transportation. Construction Project Admin- 21. Federal Highway Administration. Work Zone Safety and Mobility istration Manual. Tallahassee, 2003. Program. U.S. Department of Transportation. 6. Innovative Contracting Manual. Ohio Department of Transporta- resources/facts_stats.htm. Accessed Dec. 2008). tion, Columbus, OH, 2006. 22. Holstein, David. Work Zone Crash Analysis & Traffic Management 7. New York State Department of Transportation. Guidelines for the in Work Zones--The ODOT MOT Process. Presented at the 2005 Use of Time-Related Contract Provision. Albany, NY, 1999. Smart Work Zone Deployment Initiative Conference, Bettendorf, 8. Pinnacle One. Summary Level Study of A+B Bidding. California Iowa, May 1011, 2005. Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA, 2005. 23. Dembe A.E., Erickson J.B., Delbos R.G., and Banks S.M. The Impact 9. California Department of Transportation. Innovative Contracting of Overtime and Long Work Hours on Occupational Injuries Test and Evaluation. Sacramento, CA, 1993. and Illnesses: New Evidence from the United States. Occupational 10. California Department of Transportation. Summary Initial Report Environmental Medicine, Vol. 62, 2005, pp. 588-597. for Innovative Contracting Practices. Sacramento, CA, 1993. 24. Salem, O., and Ashraf, G. Improved Models for User Costs Analysis. 11. California Department of Transportation. The Lessons Learned Ohio Department of Transportation, Office of Research and Devel- From the Northridge Earthquake. Sacramento, CA, 1995. opment, Columbus, 2007. 12. Livingston, J. Lessons Learned from a Travel Time Incentive/ 25. New Jersey Department of Transportation. Road User Cost Manual. Disincentive on State Route 68 in Arizona, In Compendium: Papers Trenton, 2001. on Advanced Surface Transportation Systems. Presented at 2002 26. Gillespie, J. S. Estimating Road User Costs as a Basis for Incentive/ Mentors Program Advanced Surface Transportation Systems, Disincentive Amounts in Highway Construction Contracts. Virginia College Station, TX, 2002. Transportation Research Council, VTRC 98-12, Charlottesville, 1998. 13. Ibba, C. Strategies Used by State DOTs to Accelerate Highway 27. Olguin, E.T., Allison, B.T., and McCullough, B.F. Effectiveness of Construction Projects. In Compendium: Papers on Advanced Sur- Accelerating Highway Rehabilitation in Urban Areas. Research face Transportation Systems, Presented at 2002 Mentors Program Report SWUTC 60058-1, SWUTC/95/60058-1. Center for Trans- Advanced Surface Transportation Systems, College Station, TX, 2002. portation Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 1995. 14. Washington State Department of Transportation. Road User Cost 28. Federal Highway Administration. Contract Administration Core Computation. Olympia, WA, 1991. Curriculum Participant's Manual and Reference Guide. U. S. 15. Trimels, K. A. Lane Rental in Wyoming. FHWA, Cheyenne, WY, Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2006. 2000. 29. Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Adminis- 16. Strong, K. C., Tometich, J., and Raadt, N. Cost Effectiveness of tration. Maryland State Highway Authority Guidelines for the Use Design-Build, Lane Rental, and A + B Contracting Techniques. of Bidding Procedures, Liquidated Damages, Road User Benefit Presented at 2005 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Sym- Cost, Incentive/Disincentives, Special Bidding Methods A + B posium, Ames, IA, 2005. Bidding Methods. Baltimore, MD, 1994. 17. United States Government Accountability Office. Report to the 30. Sillars, D. N. Establishing Guidelines for Incentive/Disincentive Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, Contracting at ODOT. Oregon Department of Transportation, House of Representatives. FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS, Increased Salem, OR, 2007. Reliance on Contractors Can Pose Oversight Challenges for Federal 31. Felker, B. Guidelines for Use of A+B Bidding Provisions. California and State Officials, Washington, DC, 2008. Department of Transportation, Memorandum, Sacramento, 2002.