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.
6FINAL REPORT The contract agencyâs final report, âAlternative Delivery Methods for Winter Operations,â gives a detailed account of the project, findings, and conclu- sions and includes further information on the pro- posed decision-making framework. The report is available online at the AASHTO Highway Subcom- mittee on Maintenance website at http://maintenance. transportation.org/Documents/NCHRP%2020-7_ Task%20329%20Final%20Report-Final%20Revision. pdf. The report is not an official publication of the Na- tional Cooperative Highway Research Program, Trans- portation Research Board, National Research Council, or The National Academies. ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The study summarized herein was requested by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and con- ducted as part of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Project 20-07. The NCHRP is supported by annual voluntary contribu- tions from the state Departments of Transportation. Project 20-07 provides funding for quick response studies on behalf of the AASHTO Standing Com- mittee on Highways. The report was prepared by Michael J. Markow, consultant, of Teaticket, Mas- sachusetts. The work was guided by a panel of subject matter experts, which included Randolph Cook, Infrastructure Corporation of America, Inc.; Mark DeVries, McHenry County (IL) Di- vision of Transportation; Steven M. Lund, Min- nesota DOT; Richard J. Nelson, Nevada DOT; Wilfrid A. Nixon, University of Iowa; Max Per- chanok, Ontario Ministry of Transportation; Rob- ert E. Prezioso, Virginia DOT; Robert A. Younie, Iowa DOT; Paul Pisano, FHWA; and James W. Bryant, Jr., TRB. The project manager was Amir N. Hanna, NCHRP Senior Program Officer. Table 2 Example considerations in evaluating delivery methods for winter services. Basic Issue Relevant Considerations WINTER SERVICE DELIVERY METHOD Decision of in-house performance versus outsourcing; factors influencing the decision. Categories of criteria to be considered in assessing contracting options. Type and structure of contract(s) to consider: e.g., specifications, payment provisions, procurement method. Consideration of winter services within a broader performance-based maintenance and operations contract. Operational aspects of winter service: equipment selection and operation, level of service (LOS), performance measurement, storm-specific actions, and annual activities. ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY Impacts on natural environment. Training of agency personnel needed to maintain knowledge of environmental impacts and mitigation measures related to winter maintenance and operations, as well as satisfaction of regulatory requirements. Impacts on infrastructure. ECONOMIC SUSTAINABILITY Cost comparisons for different methods of delivery, assessments of cost efficiency, indirect costs, comparison of benefits and costs. Road-user benefits (in terms of both performance and cost savings) in safety, mobility, and fuel consumption. Fuel efficiency of agency vehicle fleet. SOCIAL SUSTAINABILITY Improvements in wintertime safety and mobility due to winter service. Effective and timely communication of winter road conditions to public. Impacts of winter service on cultural assets; public accessibility to, and utility of, transportation services; access to safety and security facilities; drivability of roads for individuals and public transport; and equitable treatment and social integration among all population groups.
Transportation Research Board 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 ISBN 978-0-309-28409-7 9 780309 284097 9 0 0 0 0 These digests are issued in order to increase awareness of research results emanating from projects in the Cooperative Research Programs (CRP). Persons wanting to pursue the project subject matter in greater depth should contact the CRP Staff, Transportation Research Board of the National Academies, 500 Fifth Street, NW, Washington, DC 20001. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this 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, FRA, FTA, or Transit Development Corporation endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for 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 from CRP. Subscriber Categories: Administration and Management â¢ Maintenance and Preservation