Guide for Pavement-Type Selection (2011) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Attachment - Guide for Pavement-Type Selection: Summary of Research Report
Attachment - Guide for Pavement-Type Selection: Summary of Research Report
Pages 63-70
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 63... ...
63 A T T A C H M E N T Guide for Pavement-Type Selection: Summary of Research Report
|
From page 64... ...
C O N T E N T S 65 Introduction 65 Research Objective, Scope, and Summary 65 Summary of Findings 69 References 64
|
From page 65... ...
The initial work plan for developing the Guide for Pavement-Type Selection was updated based on this information and implemented in Phase II. Summary of Findings Table 1 lists state DOTs' responses regarding the use of pavement-type selection procedures.
|
From page 66... ...
Projects Using Alternate Bidding To Select Pavement Type Alabama Y Y N ≥10 Y N <1 Arizona1 Y1 Y1 Y1 23 N N 0 Arkansas Y Y Y 10 Y N NR California Yes Yes Yes 2 No No 0 Colorado NR NR NR NR NR NR Considering 1 Delaware NR NR NR NR NR NR 0 Georgia Y Y Y 5 Y Y NR Idaho Y Y Y ≥20 Y Y 1 Illinois Y Y N ≥20 N Y 0 Indiana Y Y Y 2 Y Y NR Kansas Y Y Y ≥30 Y Y 1 Louisiana Y Y NR NR NR NR 44 Maine2 N2 N2 N2 N/A N/A N/A 0 Maryland Y Y N 3 Y N 0 Michigan Y Y Y 10 N N 0 Minnesota Y Y N ≥15 Y N 0 Missouri Y Y Y 4 Y N >100 Montana3 N3 N3 N3 N/A N/A Y 1 Nebraska4 N/A4 N/A4 N/A4 N/A N/A N/A Several Nevada5 Y5 N N 12 N Y NR New Hampshire Y Y Y 10 N Y 0 New Mexico6 Y6 Y6 Y6 >5 Y Y 0 North Carolina Y Y N 18 N N 4 to 5 North Dakota Y Y Y 30 N N 0 Ohio Y Y Y 4 Y N 2 Pennsylvania NR NR NR NR NR NR 2 to 3 South Carolina Y Y N 5 Y Y 0 South Dakota Y Y Y 14 N N 0 Tennessee7 Y7 Y7 Y7 20 N Y 1 Texas8 Y8 Y8 NR NR Y Y 0 Utah Y Y N Few Y N 0 Vermont Y Y N ≥10 Y Y 0 Washington Y Y N 5 N N 0 West Virginia Y Y Y 5 N N 0 Wisconsin Y Y Y ≥15 Y Y 0 1 Arizona does not have a formal process for pavement-type selection. However, guidelines are provided in their Preliminary Engineering and Design Manual.
|
From page 67... ...
Michigan DOT is required by law to select the alternative with the lowest life-cycle cost. Twenty-nine of the 35 responding state DOTs perform LCCA for new construction/reconstruction projects, out of which 22 report having formal procedures, 6 indicate use of a probabilistic process, and 14 indicate consideration of user costs in the analysis.
|
From page 68... ...
State DOT LCCA procedures.
|
From page 69... ...
, the agency should perform a risk analysis to determine the contractor's scope and how stringent the contract provisions for pavement-type selection should be. • In design-build projects involving operations and maintenance responsibilities and long-term performance warranty, the contractor assumes the risks associated with postconstruction for an extended period of time.
|
From page 70... ...
Agency-based pavement-type selection YES NO YES NO Identification of feasible alternatives for project Development of pavement life cycle strategies Life cycle cost analysis Evaluation of economic and noneconomic factors Alternatives from pavement-type selection committee Agency-based selection of preferred pavement types Contractor-based pavement-type selection Agency develops contract provisions Contractor reviews contract provisions and agency practices Contractor makes adjustments to inputs of agency-based selection process Alternate biddingpreferred pavement types Design-bid-buildpreferred pavement type Contractor selects an alternative for the proposal Contractor-based selection of preferred pavement type Design-build Design-build operate & maintain Performance warranty Figure 1. Overview of the pavement-type selection process.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.