Asset Management Approaches to Identifying and Evaluating Assets Damaged Due to Emergency Events (2020)

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.

Asset Management Approaches to Identifying and Evaluating Assets Damaged Due to Emergency Events A Synthesis of Highway Practice Brad W. Allen Applied pAvement technology, inc. Albany, NY 2020 Research sponsored by the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials in cooperation with the Federal Highway Administration Subscriber Categories Highways • Planning and Forecasting • Administration and Management N A T I O N A L C O O P E R A T I V E H I G H W A Y R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M NCHRP SYNTHESIS 556

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 by going to http://www.national-academies.org and then searching for TRB Printed in the United States of America NCHRP SYNTHESIS 556 Project 20-05, Topic 50-15 ISSN 0547-5570 ISBN 978-0-309-48151-9 Library of Congress Control Number 2020937212 © 2020 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. 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, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC 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. NOTICE 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 by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transporta- tion results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to high- way authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 ini- tiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agree- ment No. 693JJ31950003. The Transportation Research Board (TRB) of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine was requested by AASHTO to administer the research program because of TRB’s recognized objectivity and understanding of modern research practices. TRB is uniquely suited for this purpose for many reasons: TRB maintains an extensive com- mittee structure from which authorities on any highway transportation subject may be drawn; TRB possesses avenues of communications and cooperation with federal, state, and local governmental agencies, univer- sities, and industry; TRB’s relationship to the National Academies is an insurance of objectivity; and TRB maintains a full-time staff of special- ists in highway transportation matters to bring the findings of research directly to those in a position to use them. The program is developed on the basis of research needs iden- tified by chief administrators and other staff of the highway and transportation departments, by committees of AASHTO, and by the FHWA. Topics of the highest merit are selected by the AASHTO Special Committee on Research and Innovation (R&I), and each year R&I’s recommendations are proposed to the AASHTO Board of Direc- tors and the National Academies. Research projects to address these topics are defined by NCHRP, and qualified research agencies are selected from submitted proposals. Administration and surveillance of research contracts are the responsibilities of the National Academies and TRB. The needs for highway research are many, and NCHRP can make significant contributions to solving 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.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.national-academies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 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 individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP SYNTHESIS 556 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Jo Allen Gause, Senior Program Officer Deborah Irvin, Program Coordinator Eileen P. Delaney, Director of Publications Natalie Barnes, Associate Director of Publications NCHRP PROJECT 20-05 PANEL Joyce N. Taylor, Maine DOT, Augusta, ME (Chair) Socorro “Coco” Briseno, California DOT, Sacramento, CA (Retired) Anita Bush, Nevada DOT, Carson City, NV Joseph D. Crabtree, University of Kentucky, Lexington, KY Mostafa “Moe” Jamshidi, Nebraska DOT, Lincoln, NE Cynthia L. Jones, Ohio DOT, Columbus, OH Jessie X. Jones, Arkansas DOT, Little Rock, AR Brenda Moore, North Carolina DOT, Raleigh, NC Ben Orsbon, South Dakota DOT, Pierre, SD Randall R. “Randy” Park, Avenue Consultants, Bluffdale, UT Brian Worrel, Iowa DOT, Ames, IA Jack Jernigan, FHWA Liaison Jim McDonnell, AASHTO Liaison Stephen F. Maher, TRB Liaison TOPIC 50-15 PANEL Margaret-Avis Akofio-Sowah, WSP USA, Washington, D.C. Silvana V. Croope, University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, AL Shannon M. Foss, Minnesota DOT, Saint Paul, MN Matthew S. Haubrich, Iowa DOT, Ames, IA Zheng “Jenny” Li, Texas DOT, Austin, TX Massoud Nasrollahi, Virginia DOT, Richmond, VA Pramen Shrestha, University of Nevada, Las Vegas, NV Greg Wolf, FHWA Liaison Matthew Hardy, AASHTO Liaison Thomas Palmerlee, TRB Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Katie Zimmerman of Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., provided quality assurance reviews throughout the writing process. The author is indebted to the DOTs that participated in the survey. Their thoughtful responses are appreciated, and their contributions to making this information available are noted. In addition, the author recognizes with appreciation the time and efforts of the individuals from the California DOT, the Iowa DOT, the New York DOT, and the Oregon DOT who participated in the interviews.

ABOUT THE NCHRP SYNTHESIS PROGRAM Highway administrators, engineers, and researchers often face problems for which information already exists, either in documented form or as undocumented experience and practice. This infor- mation may be fragmented, scattered, and unevaluated. As a consequence, full knowledge of what has been learned about a problem may not be brought to bear on its solution. Costly research findings may go unused, valuable experience may be overlooked, and due consideration may not be given to recommended practices for solving or alleviating the problem. There is information on nearly every subject of concern to highway administrators and engineers. Much of it derives from research or from the work of practitioners faced with problems in their day- to-day work. To provide a systematic means for assembling and evalu ating such useful information and to make it available to the entire highway community, the American Association of State High- way and Transportation Officials—through the mechanism of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program—authorized the Transportation Research Board to undertake a continuing study. This study, NCHRP Project 20-05, “Synthesis of Information Related to Highway Problems,” searches out and synthesizes useful knowledge from all available sources and prepares concise, documented reports on specific topics. Reports from this endeavor constitute an NCHRP report series, Synthesis of Highway Practice. This synthesis series reports on current knowledge and practice, in a compact format, without the detailed directions usually found in handbooks or design manuals. Each report in the series provides a compendium of the best knowledge available on those measures found to be the most successful in resolving specific problems. FOREWORD By Jo Allen Gause Staff Officer Transportation Research Board Federal regulations require state departments of transportation (DOTs) to conduct statewide reviews to identify roads, highways, and bridges that have been damaged two or more times since 1997 by events declared emergencies by the president of the United States or by a state’s governor. DOTs are required to evaluate these damaged facilities to determine whether there are reasonable repair and reconstruction alternatives that could be considered to reduce future emergency funding needs in areas with recurring damage. The regulation requires two sets of reviews and evaluations. States require the results of these evaluations to be summarized in their risk-based transportation asset management plans and incorporated into agency asset management and project development practices. The objective of this synthesis was to document practices by state DOTs to identify locations where highway assets have been repeatedly damaged by emergency events and to consider mitigating the risk of recurring damage in those areas. The synthesis focused on identifying decisions and practices that support the use of the results to improve achievement of asset management or performance management objectives. Information for this study was gathered through a literature review, a survey of state DOTs, and follow-up interviews with selected agencies. Four case examples provide additional information on practices to identify assets repeatedly damaged by emergency events. Brad W. Allen, Applied Pavement Technology, Inc., collected and synthesized the information and wrote the report. The members of the topic panel are acknowledged on page iv. This synthesis is an immediately useful document that records practices that were acceptable within the limitations of the knowledge available at the time of its preparation. As progress in research and practice continues, new knowledge will be added to that now at hand.

1 Summary 4 Chapter 1 Introduction 4 Background 5 Objective of the Synthesis 5 Synthesis Scope and Approach 6 Terminology 7 Organization of the Report 9 Chapter 2 Review of Literature, Statutes, Regulations, and Documented Practices 9 Overview 9 U.S. DOT Emergency Relief for Disaster-Damaged Roads and Public Transportation Systems 10 Federal Statutes, Regulations, and Guidance 16 State Emergency Declarations 17 Documented State Approaches to Identify and Evaluate Repeatedly Damaged Assets 21 Emerging Issues in Emergency Relief, Repairs, and Resiliency 25 Literature Review Summary 26 Chapter 3 State of the Practice 26 Overview 26 Survey Content 50 Survey Takeaways 51 Chapter 4 Case Examples 51 The California DOT: Integration of Multiple Assessments into a Statewide Highway Strategic Management Plan 55 The Oregon DOT: Incorporating Assessment of Sites Damaged by Multiple Events into Managing Unstable Slopes 57 The New York State DOT: Integrating Data to Support Investment Decisions 58 The Iowa DOT: Developing Tools to Better Track Damage Assessment and Inform Project Planning 61 The Iowa DOT Project Scoping Tool 64 Case Example Summaries and Lessons Learned 67 Chapter 5 Conclusion 67 Conclusions About Different Agency Approaches 68 Opportunities for Future Research C O N T E N T S

70 Abbreviations, Acronyms, and Initialisms 72 References and Bibliography 74 Appendix A State Questionnaire 87 Appendix B State Survey Responses Note: Photographs, figures, and tables in this report may 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.