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 R1
NATIONAL NCHRP REPORT 688 COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Determining Highway Maintenance Costs
OCR for page R2
TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD 2011 EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE* OFFICERS CHAIR: Neil J. Pedersen, Administrator, Maryland State Highway Administration, Baltimore VICE CHAIR: Sandra Rosenbloom, Professor of Planning, University of Arizona, Tucson EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR: Robert E. Skinner, Jr., Transportation Research Board MEMBERS J. Barry Barker, Executive Director, Transit Authority of River City, Louisville, KY Deborah H. Butler, Executive Vice President, Planning, and CIO, Norfolk Southern Corporation, Norfolk, VA William A.V. Clark, Professor, Department of Geography, University of California, Los Angeles Eugene A. Conti, Jr., Secretary of Transportation, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh James M. Crites, Executive Vice President of Operations, Dallas-Fort Worth International Airport, TX Paula J. Hammond, Secretary, Washington State DOT, Olympia Adib K. Kanafani, Cahill Professor of Civil Engineering, University of California, Berkeley Susan Martinovich, Director, Nevada DOT, Carson City Michael R. Morris, Director of Transportation, North Central Texas Council of Governments, Arlington Tracy L. Rosser, Vice President, Regional General Manager, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc., Mandeville, LA Steven T. Scalzo, Chief Operating Officer, Marine Resources Group, Seattle, WA Henry G. (Gerry) Schwartz, Jr., Chairman (retired), Jacobs/Sverdrup Civil, Inc., St. Louis, MO Beverly A. Scott, General Manager and CEO, Metropolitan Atlanta Rapid Transit Authority, Atlanta, GA David Seltzer, Principal, Mercator Advisors LLC, Philadelphia, PA Lawrence A. Selzer, President and CEO, The Conservation Fund, Arlington, VA Kumares C. Sinha, Olson Distinguished Professor of Civil Engineering, Purdue University, West Lafayette, IN Daniel Sperling, Professor of Civil Engineering and Environmental Science and Policy; Director, Institute of Transportation Studies; and Interim Director, Energy Efficiency Center, University of California, Davis Kirk T. Steudle, Director, Michigan DOT, Lansing Douglas W. Stotlar, President and CEO, Con-Way, Inc., Ann Arbor, MI C. Michael Walton, Ernest H. Cockrell Centennial Chair in Engineering, University of Texas, Austin EX OFFICIO MEMBERS Peter H. Appel, Administrator, Research and Innovative Technology Administration, U.S.DOT J. Randolph Babbitt, Administrator, Federal Aviation Administration, U.S.DOT Rebecca M. Brewster, President and COO, American Transportation Research Institute, Smyrna, GA Anne S. Ferro, Administrator, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, U.S.DOT John T. Gray, Senior Vice President, Policy and Economics, Association of American Railroads, Washington, DC John C. Horsley, Executive Director, American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, Washington, DC David T. Matsuda, Deputy Administrator, Maritime Administration, U.S.DOT Victor M. Mendez, Administrator, Federal Highway Administration, U.S.DOT William W. Millar, President, American Public Transportation Association, Washington, DC Tara O'Toole, Under Secretary for Science and Technology, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC Robert J. Papp (Adm., U.S. Coast Guard), Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC Cynthia L. Quarterman, Administrator, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Peter M. Rogoff, Administrator, Federal Transit Administration, U.S.DOT David L. Strickland, Administrator, National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, U.S.DOT Joseph C. Szabo, Administrator, Federal Railroad Administration, U.S.DOT Polly Trottenberg, Assistant Secretary for Transportation Policy, U.S.DOT Robert L. Van Antwerp (Lt. Gen., U.S. Army), Chief of Engineers and Commanding General, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Washington, DC Barry R. Wallerstein, Executive Officer, South Coast Air Quality Management District, Diamond Bar, CA *Membership as of March 2011.
OCR for page R3
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM NCHRP REPORT 688 Determining Highway Maintenance Costs Cambridge Systematics, Inc. Cambridge, MA WITH EVS, Inc. Eden Prairie, MN Michael J. Markow Teaticket, MA Subscriber Categories Maintenance and Preservation Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH BOARD WASHINGTON, D.C. 2011 www.TRB.org
OCR for page R4
NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY NCHRP REPORT 688 RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed research provides the most effective Project 14-18 approach to the solution of many problems facing highway ISSN 0077-5614 administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local ISBN 978-0-309-21315-8 interest and can best be studied by highway departments individually Library of Congress Control Number 2011928173 or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the © 2011 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. accelerating growth of highway transportation develops increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of COPYRIGHT INFORMATION cooperative research. Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining In recognition of these needs, the highway administrators of the written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials published or copyrighted material used herein. initiated in 1962 an objective national highway research program Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this employing modern scientific techniques. This program is supported on publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of the FMCSA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, Association and it receives the full cooperation and support of the method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for Federal Highway Administration, United States Department of educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission Transportation. from CRP. The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies was requested by the Association to administer the research program because of the Board's recognized objectivity and understanding of NOTICE modern research practices. The Board is uniquely suited for this purpose as it maintains an extensive committee structure from which The project that is the subject of this report was a part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program, conducted by the Transportation Research Board with the approval of authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; it the Governing Board of the National Research Council. possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, The members of the technical panel selected to monitor this project and to review this state and local governmental agencies, universities, and industry; its report were chosen for their special competencies and with regard for appropriate balance. relationship to the National Research Council is an insurance of The report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved objectivity; it maintains a full-time research correlation staff of by the Governing Board of the National Research Council. specialists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the research directly to those who are in a position to use them. researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation The program is developed on the basis of research needs identified Research Board, the National Research Council, or the program sponsors. by chief administrators of the highway and transportation departments The Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, the National Research and by committees of AASHTO. Each year, specific areas of research Council, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not needs to be included in the program are proposed to the National endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers' names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. Research Council and the Board by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials. Research projects to fulfill these needs are defined by the Board, and qualified research agencies are selected from those that have submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Research Council and the Transportation Research Board. The needs for highway research are many, and the National Cooperative Highway Research Program can make significant contributions to the solution of highway transportation problems of mutual concern to many responsible groups. The program, however, is intended to complement rather than to substitute for or duplicate other highway research programs. Published reports of the NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from: Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet at: http://www.national-academies.org/trb/bookstore Printed in the United States of America
OCR for page R5
The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. On the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering. The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, on its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine. The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy's purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council. The Transportation Research Board is one of six major divisions of the National Research Council. The mission of the Transporta- tion Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation innovation and progress through research and information exchange, conducted within a setting that is objective, interdisciplinary, and multimodal. The Board's varied activities annually engage about 7,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individu- als interested in the development of transportation. www.TRB.org www.national-academies.org
OCR for page R6
COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAMS CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP REPORT 688 Christopher W. Jenks, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Crawford F. Jencks, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Amir N. Hanna, Senior Program Officer Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Doug English, Editor NCHRP PROJECT 14-18 PANEL Field of Maintenance--Area of Maintenance of Way and Structures Jennifer Brandenburg, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh, NC (Chair) James Carney, Missouri DOT, Jefferson City, MO Edgardo D. Block, Connecticut DOT, Newington, CT Tracy D. Larkin-Thomason, Nevada DOT, Carson City, NV Michael Mattison, Nebraska DOR, Lincoln, NE David Peshkin, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., Urbana, IL Tammy B. Sims, Texas DOT, Austin, TX Marshall L. Stivers, Infrastructure Corporation of America, Tallahassee, FL Joseph Gregory, FHWA Liaison Frank N. Lisle, TRB Liaison
OCR for page R7
FOREWORD By Amir N. Hanna Staff Officer Transportation Research Board This report presents a practical process for determining an agency's full costs associated with performing highway maintenance. The process can be applied to any specific mainte- nance activity and ensures that the resulting full cost incorporates a fair share of both main- tenance program and enterprise support costs. In addition, the report documents the appli- cation of the full cost determination process for a number of highway agencies and different maintenance activities to demonstrate the types of options, exceptions, and decisions that would be needed in order to perform the full cost calculation. The material contained in the report should be of immediate interest to state maintenance engineers and others involved in the maintenance of highway infrastructure. Because of growing demands and resource limitations for highway maintenance, state departments of transportation (DOTs) and other highway agencies often consider non- traditional means for financing and contracting these services. For example, some state DOTs have considered the options of outsourcing and publicprivate partnership of some main- tenance services. The transportation agency's costs associated with a specific maintenance activity are usually considered when exploring alternative delivery methods for such activ- ity. However, some of the elements making up the total agency cost of an activity are often not properly considered or, in some instances, are not included. Although knowledge of the costs associated with specific maintenance activities if done by the transportation agency itself is necessary for exploring alternative delivery methods, there is no widely accepted process for determining such costs. Thus research was needed to identify current practices, review relevant information, and develop a rational process that considers all cost elements. Under NCHRP Project 14-18, "Determining Highway Maintenance Costs," Cambridge Systematics, Inc., of Massachusetts worked with the objective of developing a process for determining an agency's costs associated with performing highway maintenance. It was also required that the process be flexible enough that it can be applied to any specific mainte- nance activity. To accomplish this objective, the research (a) reviewed available informa- tion relevant to the practices for determining costs associated with performing highway maintenance activities, identified the cost elements required to accurately determine the full cost of any specific highway maintenance activity, performed a preliminary evaluation of available cost determination approaches, and developed a preliminary full cost determina- tion process and (b) evaluated the process using data from a number of state DOTs, intro- duced the necessary changes, and developed the recommended full cost determination process. The process is supplemented with examples to illustrate application of the process
OCR for page R8
using data from six state DOTs as well as examples of tracking maintenance activity costs by three other state DOTs. The full cost determination process will be particularly useful to highway agencies because it provides a realistic estimate of the costs of maintenance activities and helps high- way agencies in evaluating alternatives for performing maintenance activities and making decisions that would result in better use of resources. The adoption of this process by AASHTO is, therefore, suggested.
OCR for page R9
CONTENTS 1 Summary 1 Project Objectives 1 Findings 4 Chapter 1 Introduction 4 1.1 Background 4 1.2 Objective and Research Approach 5 1.3 Applications of the Full Cost Determination Process 5 1.4 Introduction to Tenets of Full Cost Determination 6 1.5 Report Organization 7 Chapter 2 Full Cost Determination Framework 7 2.1 Introduction 7 2.2 Definitions 10 2.3 Building the Full Cost Determination Process 16 2.4 Tenets of Full Cost Determination 20 Chapter 3 Full Cost Determination Process 20 3.1 Step 1: Gather and Classify Maintenance Program Activities and Expenditures 21 3.2 Step 2: Allocate Maintenance Support Expenditures to Line Activities 23 3.3 Step 3: Gather and Classify Enterprise Programs and Expenditures 24 3.4 Step 4: Allocate a Portion of Enterprise Support Expenditures to the Maintenance Program 25 3.5 Step 5: Combine Cost Categories to Derive Full Cost 26 3.6 Calculation Options and Exceptions 31 3.7 Additional Considerations 33 Chapter 4 Conclusions and Suggested Research 33 4.1 Full Cost Determination Process 34 4.2 Suggestions for Additional Research 35 References 36 Bibliography 37 Glossary 39 Attachment Recommended Process for Determining Full Cost of Highway Maintenance Activities Note: Many of the photographs, figures, and tables in this report have been converted from color to grayscale for printing. The electronic version of the report (posted on the Web at www.trb.org) retains the color versions.