National Academies Press: OpenBook

Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices (2011)

Chapter: Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting

« Previous: Chapter Five - Identification of Needs
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"Chapter Six - Prioritization, Planning, and Budgeting." National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. 2011. Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/14500.
×
Page 31

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.

27 This section outlines how M&R needs are prioritized, sched- uled for implementation through programming, and then molded into a budget for a CIP (Wade et al. 2007b). Also described is the computer software that facilitates the identi- fication of M&R needs and prioritization. The listing of all M&R needs, such as those shown in Tables 9 and 10 in chapter five, represent an unlimited budget. The unlimited budget will change for the following reasons: • Economic considerations. Not all M&R treatments can be carried out to the extent and at the time recom- mended by the unlimited budget because of financial constraints. • Operational considerations. Scheduling of the projects avoids interfering with airport operation. It is particularly important for scheduling work on runways and taxiways that provide service that cannot be picked up by alterna- tive facilities. Other operational concerns include safety issues, airlines’ operations, and allowable closures. • Other construction work. Pavement preservation work is typically coordinated with other airfield maintenance and construction activities. For example, during the replacement of an in-pavement lighting system on a runway, pavement preservation work can be carried out on a parallel taxiway. • Construction capacity. The schedule may need to take into account capabilities of the local construction indus- try and the capability of the airport agency to manage construction work. PRIORITIZATION The prioritization of needs is described for the same two sce- narios used for the identification of needs—short-term plan- ning and long-term planning. Prioritization for Short-Term Planning Short-term planning supports only limited prediction of future network conditions without considering alternative future pavement conditions resulting from M&R treatments. The historical and predicted condition of the pavement net- work can be used to evaluate the adequacy of different pave- ment preservation budgets. It is also possible to use the back- log of projects as an indication of desirable funding levels. The first step in the prioritization is the assignment of a priority level to each M&R treatment on the list of treatments representing the unlimited budget. The priority level reflects the main reason why the treatment is recommended for implementation. The priority levels are related to the levels of service used to identify M&R needs and include safety, critical, cost-effectiveness, and target-priority levels. a) Safety Level Prioritization—The safety priority level is the highest priority for airport pavement maintenance and includes M&R treatments that are needed to main- tain safe operation of aircraft. In general, this level includes projects to meet safety and regulatory require- ments mandated by the FAA and environmental agen- cies. In the pavement area, the safety priority level may include, for example, M&R treatments for an AC sec- tion with raveling surface resulting in FOD or a runway with inadequate pavement friction. Because treatments in this category are obligatory, it can also include car- ryover projects (already approved projects and projects that are in progress and need additional funding). b) Critical Level Prioritization—The critical priority level includes M&R treatments that are necessary to provide or maintain a minimum acceptable level of service. c) Cost-effectiveness Level Prioritization—This level includes projects where implementation timing is important to achieve cost-effectiveness. Typically, this level includes preventive maintenance projects, such as joint resealing, carried out before more significant damage occurs. Approximately 29% of the responding airports indicated that they implement preventive maintenance treatments at the right time, and about 57% of airports noted that they sometimes implement preventive maintenance treatments at the right time (Figure 17). d) Target Level Prioritization—Target level includes proj- ects to maintain or achieve the target level of service. Projects that belong to the critical level and apply to run- ways would have higher priority than projects that belong to the cost-effectiveness level and apply to taxiways. It is easier and preferable to prioritize projects that belong to the same priority level and functional class than to priori- tize projects across priority levels and functional classes. Pri- oritization across functional classes, for the same priority CHAPTER SIX PRIORITIZATION, PLANNING, AND BUDGETING

level, can be facilitated by developing priority rankings of the type shown in Table 11. The highest ranking, in this sim- plified example, is assigned to runways serving a high num- ber of aircraft operations. Prioritization can be based on a single characteristic such as PCI or on a composite indicator that combines the influ- ence of several characteristics. An example of prioritization of M&R treatments for 271 pavement sections using a composite priority indicator was provided by Tighe et al. (2004). The composite priority indi- cator combines the influence of four factors: 1. PCI of the section. This factor represents pavement characteristics and was assigned the highest weight- ing. In general, other pavement characteristics that can be used include a friction index and FOD potential. 2. Number of annual aircraft departures taking off from the section. This factor represents volume of aircraft movements and can be alternatively represented by, for example, the total number of aircraft operations. 3. Functional class of the section (runway, taxiway, apron). 4. Operational importance of the section (primary, sec- ondary, or tertiary). For example, a runway may be pri- mary or secondary; an apron may be primary, sec- ondary, or tertiary. Another factor that can be incorporated into a composite priority indicator is cost-effectiveness—the ratio of effec- 28 tiveness and the net present value—defined in the section on Prioritization for Long-Term Planning. Inclusion of Preventive Maintenance Preventive maintenance reinforces the concept of the right treatment on the right pavement at the right time. According to the survey, about 29% of agencies reported that they implement preventive maintenance treatments at the right time (see Figure 17). For comparison, a 1999 survey of state transportation agencies, carried out by the AASHTO Pave- ment Preservation Lead State Team (2000), reported that 85% of the 41 agencies that responded to the survey have established a preventive pavement maintenance program. Systematic implementation of preventive maintenance treat- ments may represent a shift in the way the pavement preser- vation is done. The selection of sections for M&R is not done using a worst-condition-first approach, but by selecting sec- tions where an M&R treatment would be most cost-effective. Often, the most cost-effective treatment is a preventive main- tenance treatment. At the same time, agencies still have to maintain pavements to provide safe operation of the aircraft and provide a minimum level of service. A systematic application of a preventive maintenance pro- gram for airport pavements has not been well-documented. Most of the experience has been reported by state highway agencies as it applies to highway pavements (Geoffroy 1996; Zimmerman and Wolters 2003). The Foundation for Pavement Preservation (2001) developed useful guidelines for launching a preventive maintenance program and outlined the need to establish the overall strategies and goals of the program. Prioritization for Long-Term Planning Multi-year prioritization of alternative treatments is typically based on cost-effectiveness. Cost-effectiveness is the ratio of the effectiveness (benefits) and costs for individual M&R treatments. The cost of the treatment is based on life-cycle costs as much as possible (Zimmerman et al. 2000). The effec- tiveness for an airport pavement section can be calculated by multiplying (1) the area under the pavement performance curve, (2) the number of aircraft departures, and (3) the area of the pavement section (Tighe et al. 2004). 0 20 40 60 Yes Sometimes No Implementation of preventive maintenance Pe rc en t o f r es po nd en ts Aircraft Operations or Usage Priority Rank Functional Class High Medium Low 1 2 4 3 5 7 Runways Taxiways Aprons 6 8 9 FIGURE 17 Implementation of preventive maintenance treatments at the right time. TABLE 11 PRIORITY RANKING BY FUNCTIONAL CLASS AND TRAFFIC

29 The area under the pavement performance curve repre- sents the beneficial effect of the pavement condition that is above the minimum recommended pavement condition as shown in Figure 18. Figure 18 illustrates the difference in the area under the performance curve for two alternatives: an overlay and microsurfacing. For simplicity, it is assumed that the change of PCI with pavement age is linear. The number of aircraft departures is used as the measure of aircraft operations that benefit from the improved pavement condition. The use of aircraft departures instead of the total number of aircraft operations accounts for higher pavement loads during departures. The area of the pavement section is used to account for the differences in the length and width of airport pavement sections. The dimensions of the pavement section are thus included in the calculation of both the cost and the effec- tiveness. Multi-year prioritization analysis need not include pro- jects addressing the safety and critical priority levels, because these projects are obligatory. Projects addressing the cost- effectiveness priority level and the target priority level are analyzed simultaneously because both are prioritized on the cost-effectiveness basis. The analysis has the potential to yield the most cost-effective combination of preventive main- tenance projects and other pavement preservation projects. Projects are selected for implementation using incremental cost-effectiveness analysis. This facilitates a multi-year projec- tion of impacts of the selected M&R treatment on the health of the pavement network. The result of multi-year prioritization analysis is a prioritized list of pavement preservation projects for different years that meet specific budget requirements. Long-term planning and prioritization of needs, incorpo- rating incremental cost-effectiveness analysis, has been suc- cessfully implemented by many transportation agencies on large highway networks (Federal Highway Administration 1996). The implementation for airport networks is still in initial phases. A clear example of prioritization using cost- effectiveness analysis for an airport pavement network is provided by Tighe et al. (2004). The reasons for slower implementation include smaller airport pavement networks, greater importance of operational constraints, and the limita- tions of existing software. PROGRAMMING AND BUDGETING Programming activities move projects from the initiation, pri- oritization, and budget stages to the design stage and to imple- mentation. Budgeting builds on the results of planning and programming activities and produces a budget—a financial document that specifies how the money will be invested in air- port infrastructure. The type of projects included in the airport capital budget depend on local circumstances. Whereas large airports may have a budget dedicated solely to pavement preservation, capital budgets for smaller airports combine all projects con- 0 60 0 3 6 0 60 100 0 3 129 Area 10 25 40 Area Now Now Age, years Pavement graph for micro-surfacing 100 129 15 18 Area = ½[(35 times 9) –(10 times 3)] Age, years Pavement graph for overlay 6 15 18P av em en t C on di tio n In de x (P CI ) Area = ½[40 (PCI units) times 12 (years)] Minimum recommended PCI Minimum recommended PCI Area under the performance curve Pa ve m en t C on di tio n In de x (P CI ) Area under the performance curve FIGURE 18 Example calculation of treatment effectiveness.

cerning airfield infrastructure, and not just pavement preser- vation projects, to establish CIP. For example, the budget may also include projects related to the expansion of the air- field pavements, operational improvements, and M&R of other airfield infrastructure, such as buildings and guidance systems. Some authorities prepare a combined budget for a group of airports they manage. The budgeting process is part of asset management, the process that strives to manage all airport infrastructure assets together to achieve the efficient allocation of resources. Funding Sources According to the survey results, the majority of airport agen- cies establish a pavement preservation budget by considering pavement preservation needs and PCI (Figure 19). The main source of funding for pavement preservation, as reported by airport operators, was the FAA (Figure 20). Funding can also come from state aviation offices and other sources. The main source of federal funding for airport pavement preservation is the Airport Improvement Program (AIP) administered by the FAA. The AIP provides grants for the planning and development of public-use airports that are included in the National Plan for Integrated Airport Systems. For large and medium primary hub airports, the grant covers 75% of eligible costs. For small primary, reliever, and general aviation airports, the grant covers 95% of eligible costs. Eli- gible costs include costs of runway, taxiway, and apron con- struction and rehabilitation, and costs associated with airfield drainage improvements. The projects must involve more than $25,000 in AIP funds. In accordance with Public Law 103-305, section 107, amended Title 49, section 47105, of the United States Code, the FAA requires that airport owners receiving any grants for pavement construction or rehabilitation provide assurances that the airport has implemented an effective Airport Pave- ment Maintenance Management Program (APMMP). The features of an effective APMMP are described in FAA Engi- neering Policy 99-01. This policy, as well as other docu- ments associated with AIP, is available on the FAA website (www.faa.gov/airports/aip). 30 There is a variety of state funding programs that support air- port pavement preservation. In addition, several states, under the FAA State Block Grant Program, assume the responsibil- ity of administering AIP grants at smaller airports. Budget Development Budgeting takes in account engineering and financial con- cerns, mandatory safety and regulatory requirements, and air- port operational concerns. The process of establishing a bud- get is schematically illustrated in Figure 21. As shown in this figure, budget development takes into account a number of needs and considerations, including the following: • Pavement preservation needs such as mandatory pro- jects based on the safety priority level and prioritized M&R treatments established through APMS. • Other airfield needs affecting airport pavements such as the expansion of the airfield pavement network, safety and functional improvements, in-pavement lighting, drainage improvements, and projects involving under- ground utilities. Budgetary considerations include the following: • Financial considerations such as budget constraints in terms of available funding and the time frame when the funding is available. Financial considerations may also dictate staging the project to meet specific completion dates. It is often advantageous to combine construction projects to achieve economies of scale. According to Stroup-Gardiner and Shatnawi (2008), significant cost savings can be achieved by organizing pavement preser- vation work into larger contracts. This activity can be feasible for large airports or for airport agencies that manage several airports in one geographical area. • Operational considerations include the impact on airport operations experienced by carriers and other airport users, safety concerns during construction, and the importance of the facility to overall operations (Wade et al. 2007b). Budget Evaluation Budget evaluation, within the framework of pavement preser- vation, examines the relationship between the investment in 0 20 40 60 80 100 Last-year budget Based on PCI Preservation needs Other Establishing budget for pavement preservation Pe rc en t o f r es po nd en ts 0 25 50 75 100 FAA State Local Source of pavement preservation funding Pe rc en t o f r es po nd en ts FIGURE 19 Methods used to establish pavement preservation budgets. FIGURE 20 Sources of pavement preservation funding.

31 pavement preservation and the resulting condition of the pave- ment network. It also attempts to quantify the adequacy of the budget in meeting pavement preservation needs. Budget eval- uation tools include the following: • Monitoring pavement performance trends. An example of monitoring pavement condition in terms of PCI is shown in Figure 8 in chapter three. • Monitoring of expenditures. For example, some road agencies monitor yearly expenditures on pavement pre- servation in terms of dollars per square yard of pavement. • Tracking the dollar value of unfunded pavement preser- vation needs, if any, and yearly changes in unfunded needs. • Evaluation of the consequences of different budget lev- els on the future condition of the pavement network. The future pavement condition is typically measured in terms of PCI. COMPUTATIONAL SUPPORT Software Management of the pavement database and the identification and prioritization of M&R projects requires extensive data processing using specialized computer software. Many prac- titioners view APMS as computer-based decision support systems. There are several pavement management software products that can be purchased and customized by airport agencies. According to the survey, all airport agencies that have an operational APMS use a software application. About 53% of airports reported using MicroPAVER, whereas 13% of airports used other commercial software (Figure 22). MicroPAVER is a public use PMS application. Pavement administrators and engineers select the APMS software based on individual needs, as each PMS package has different strengths and weaknesses. Because MicroPAVER was publicly developed and is publicly supported, the follow- ing list of advantages and disadvantages of MicroPAVER is provided only as an example and guidance to the characteris- tics that can be used to evaluate and select APMS software. Advantages of MicroPAVER include: • Long-term support by the FAA and other agencies, and ongoing enhancements. • Relatively inexpensive. • Incorporates ASTM PCI evaluation methodology. • Highly scalable; used by small and large airports. • Integrated with GIS platform; for example, enables graphical representation of pavement condition. • Dependable pavement performance prediction based on “family” curves. • Enables generation of customized reports and exporting data to other software applications. • Customized maintenance policy (for stop-gap, preven- tive, and global). • Estimates pavement life extension resulting from main- tenance treatments. • Evaluation of different budget alternatives (unlimited budget, maintain current condition, constrained annual budget, eliminate backlog). Other airfield needs • System expansion • Safety and other improvements • Underground utilities, etc, Operational considerations • Impact on airport operations • Safety of operations • Importance of facility Pavement preservation needs •Mandatory projects •Prioritized preservation needs Financial considerations • Budget constraints • Economy of scaleBudget development Packaging of projects Scheduling Prioritization Budget formulation and reporting Budget evaluation Needs Considerations 0 20 40 60 MicroPAVER Other commercial software In-house software Type of APMS software Pe rc en t o f r es po nd en ts FIGURE 21 Programming and budgeting activities. FIGURE 22 Use of APMS software.

Disadvantages of MicroPAVER include: • Cost of M&R treatments on the network level is based on PCI range and not on specific M&R treatments that address root causes of pavement distress. • Limited optimization features on network level; opti- mization is based on PCI value and facility types with- out considering costs and benefits of the individual M&R treatments. • Lack of user customization may require longer imple- mentation. Based on the survey, 47% of APMS software was oper- ated by in-house staff with outside support (Figure 23). Thirty-three percent of APMS software was operated by in- house staff, and 20% of agencies use outside consultants to operate their APMS. New FAA Software The FAA is developing airport pavement management soft- ware called PAVEAIR to be distributed to airports and airport engineers for implementation on commercial and general avi- ation airports. PAVEAIR will be a web-based application for easy dissemination of information and will allow data for multiple airports to be made available on a single server con- nected to the web. The FAA server installed at the FAA 32 William J. Hughes Technical Center is intended to be a repos- itory for PMS data from PAVEAIR on airport projects funded under AIP; this will allow the FAA to monitor the perfor- mance of AIP projects and gain needed information on vari- ables and materials that impact pavement performance. PAVEAIR software will be available to users as a free download and the software will initially be similar to MicroPAVER in application and operational features. Exist- ing MicroPAVER databases (Micro Paver e60 files and Micro Paver MDB files) can be imported into PAVEAIR so that current MicroPAVER users will not lose any existing data. The first release of PAVEAIR will have the functional- ity of MicroPAVER Version 5.3. The release of PAVEAIR is planned for late 2010. 0 20 40 60 In-house staff In-house and outside staff Mainly consultants Operation of APMS Pe rc en t o f r es po nd en ts FIGURE 23 Operation of APMS.

Next: Chapter Seven - Project Design and Implementation »
Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

TRB’s Airport Cooperative Research Program (ACRP) Synthesis 22: Common Airport Pavement Maintenance Practices explores how airports implement a pavement maintenance management program, including inspecting and tracking pavement condition, scheduling maintenance, identifying necessary funds, and treating distresses in asphalt and concrete pavements.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!