National Academies Press: OpenBook
« Previous: NCHRP Synthesis 257: Maintenance Issues and Allternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel
Page 1
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 1
Page 2
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 2
Page 3
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 3
Page 4
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 4
Page 5
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 5
Page 6
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 6
Page 7
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 7
Page 8
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 8
Page 9
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 9
Page 10
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 10
Page 11
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 11
Page 12
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 12
Page 13
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 13
Page 14
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 14
Page 15
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 15
Page 16
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 16
Page 17
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 17
Page 18
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 18
Page 19
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 19
Page 20
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 20
Page 21
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 21
Page 22
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 22
Page 23
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 23
Page 24
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 24
Page 25
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 25
Page 26
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 26
Page 27
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 27
Page 28
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 28
Page 29
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 29
Page 30
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 30
Page 31
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 31
Page 32
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 32
Page 33
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 33
Page 34
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 34
Page 35
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 35
Page 36
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 36
Page 37
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 37
Page 38
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 38
Page 39
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 39
Page 40
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 40
Page 41
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 41
Page 42
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 42
Page 43
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 43
Page 44
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 44
Page 45
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 45
Page 46
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 46
Page 47
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 47
Page 48
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 48
Page 49
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 49
Page 50
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 50
Page 51
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 51
Page 52
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 52
Page 53
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 53
Page 54
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 54
Page 55
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 55
Page 56
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 56
Page 57
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 57
Page 58
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 58
Page 59
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 59
Page 60
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 60
Page 61
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 61
Page 62
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 62
Page 63
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 63
Page 64
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 64
Page 65
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 65
Page 66
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 66
Page 67
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 67
Page 68
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 68
Page 69
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 69
Page 70
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 70
Page 71
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 71
Page 72
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 72
Page 73
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 73
Page 74
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 74
Page 75
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 75
Page 76
Suggested Citation:"APPENDIX C: Survey Responses." Transportation Research Board. 1998. Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/6349.
×
Page 76

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.

NCHRP Web Document 11 NCHRP Synthesis 257: Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel APPENDIX C: Survey Responses ( Abbreviations at end of each table) | Painting (Section I A) All VOC VOC Plan Bolts Box Girder Interiors Edges Shop Limits | ~l l l | Painted System ~ Why | Prep ~ Why AK Y Y MAKE HD MG Y PRIME CP R. G CSP EQUAL TRCOAT AL N Y GO TO HD,MG N R. G ALWAY l l | WATER | 32 l l | REQ | S NG AZ SAME HD N G NG AR N MAKE HD MG SAME CP G ~ ALWAY EQUAL B2 S NG CA N Y ALREADY HD MG Y SAME CP G NG COMPLIAN B2 VIS T CT Y INT Y HD MG CP EI R CSP NG MEMBE B2 WHITE VIS R ONLY TOPCO CO Y Y _ B2 Y PRIME CP EI G NG ONLY DE Y Y MG SAME CP G A SAME FL CP EI _ VIS Existing Policy REP OC Z REP OC REP REP OC REP Z OCSP REP Z SPOC ZSPOC REP SP ZOC REP Z SPOC 1 .;

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Painting (Section I A) | | ' 'OC | VOC Plan | :lolts | Box Girder :nteriors| Edges Painted System Why Prep Why GAN Y ALREADY HD N G CS NG | COMPLIAN | l l l l | En | Y l I ADDRESSE | | SAME | CP | G | A D IL N ' <340 G Y Y CPEI Y NG : 1 1 1 1 1 IVIS 1 1 IN N Y SHOP B2 N G A ONLY IA N USE MG B2 CP EI G NG | I WEA.ST SOLID | BORNE l l l l l KS N Y PRIMER HD MG Y EM = CP EI G CS NG ONLY B2 ZN VIS KY N Y <350 MG,B1 IZ CP R,G A CS E l l I NG LA Y INT <350 B2 N N A | R ONLY l l l l l l l MA N Y NO PROB HD MG Y CP EI G CS l l l l I | | VIS | I WELDI MD N <350 B EXr CP EI R G NG VIS Existing Policy z SPOC REP SP z REP Z SP OC REP SP ZOC REP OC REP Z OC SCOP REP SP OC REP Z OC 2

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Painting (Section I A) | All | lOC | VOC Plan | 301ts | Box Girder Interiors | Edges Shop Limits Painted System ~ Why ~ Prep ~ Why ME | Y | ~| | ID MG | Y EXI ~| CP | R | A NG | | 3 | | WHITE I l Ml | Y | r | SAME l l EXI | CP El | R | CS NG MN | N | r | MEET~ \1GZn T Y | IZ | CPEI T R MO N r WILLBE GB2 Y IZ CPEI G NG | COMPL OR | l l | ANPOPTLY l l l l l l MT N WEA ST TYPE 3 PRIME CP VIS R NG NC | Y l| <350 | HD | Y | EXI' | CP VIS | R G NG ND | Y l | CHANGE | HD MG | Y | Y | CP | G C5 NG NE | N l | CURRENT | B | N l l | R G | NG NH | Y l | <350 | MG B2 Y EXT ~ CP El j G NJ Y Y CHANGE HD MG Y EXT CP VIS G A l l | MHARNU F | B2 | | WHITE | NM | N |, | EMQAUAEL | B2 | Y | SAME | CP | R NV l N | B2 | Y | SAME | CP | R | ALWAY NY | Y l | <350 | Bl | Y | | CP | N | ALWAY | Existing Policy REP SP OC REP REP SP ZOC REP SP ZOC REP SP REP OC z REP OC OC REP OC Z REP OC SPZ OC 3

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, cont~nuect Synthesis 257 survey responses Painting (Section I A) AllVOC VOC Plan Bolts Box Girder Interiors Edges Painted System Why Prep Why OH N Y ONLY HD DON'T R G NG PRIMER USE OK N N CHANGE SAME CP N N OR Y Y CHANGE HG B2 Y SAME CP R,G CSP PA Y Y TASK HD MG Y SAME CP EI G A FORCE VIS | N | r | SAME | ~)MG T N l l | G | CS SC | N 1 ~| CHANGE l l l l | | S CSP SD Y Y NOT G CSP ADDRESSE D TN MAY Y <340 MG B2 SAME CP G ALWAY S TX UT NO PLAN B2 PRIME CP R,G CSP NG VA N Y MAKE HD.MG PRIME EI G NG COMP B2 R/ TCOAT VE Y Y HD MG NO USE R ALWAY SNG WA N Y B2 EXT CP EI R NG WHITE VIS Wl | Y | Y | MEET | HDB | DONT 1 | | G T CSPNG Existing Policy REP MOST Z LITTLE REP Z SPOC REP Z SPOC REP OC REP SPOC REP SP ZOC REP Z SP OC REP REP Z SPOC REP OC OC REP SP 4

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Painting (Section I A) VOC ~ VOC Plan Bolts Box Girder Interiors Edges Shop Limits l j Painted System | Why Prep | WV | MAY | ~ ~| EXIST | ID MG | Y SAME | CP | G WY ~ N ~ TO VOC ~ 32 ~ ~ ~ G ~ CSP NG ALB j N WS ~N/A ~EN ~ NSATI j ~ BC | MAY | , | CHANGE | HD MG | Y SAME | CP | R. G | INC NB | N | | N/A | HD B2 | Y PRIME | CP | R. G ONT | Y l | N/A | HD | N | | N I _ NF I r | NO PLAN | HGMG | N I T | G NS l l l l l l l l l SAS N N NO USE G NG Existing Policy REP Z SPOC OC REP OC SPZ REP Z SPOC REP Z SPOC REP SP OCZ REP REP OC Bl=Black with tolaant pnmer, B2=Black wl~ system pnmer, EM - oxy mastic 5

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 su~vey responses Paint-Nev' (Table A) | Paint-Existing Type ~ VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep ~ Slip ~ Spec ~ Costs ~ Type ~ VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep ~ Spec AK l ZMCU/ <340 | S | SP10 | B | STATE | 0.30/ | ZM2W | <340 | S SP6 | STATE | UMMCU/MC | l l l | | LB | M~CU/MCU l l l l l l l l | | M~ CU/MMCU/MCU <340 | S SP6 PW | STATE AL I I I I T I T I I I AR 1 IZ/PU/PU -- | S | SP10 | A | M300 | | RE IZ/PU/PU | SP10 | M300 l l l l | | STATE l l | | STATE CA | WIZ | O | AIR | SP10 | | M300 | 5.00 | WE VA/WBA <250 | AIR SP6 | STATE CT | IZ/EP/PU | <420 | MR | SP10 | B | NEPCOl T | 2.66 | RE] ' IZ EP PU <420 | MR SP10 | NEPCOAT l l l l l | | SP ALKYD <420 | B,R SP3 | STATE CO I IZ/PU <240 T s tSP6 1 A 1 1 1 MCU 1 1 DE l IZ/EP/PU <350 | B OR S | SP10 | l l | RE SP Z | SPI,SP2 | ~ 1 ~ ~LLLU~ FL IZ/EP/PU <420 S/RSIS SP10 _ STATE _ AEM AEM <420 SR SP3 or SP6 STATE l l l l l l l | | SR l GA ALKYD <340 S SP6 STATE WBA/ <240 B S R SP6 STATE | MCU | | MR | SP3 l l | | M('U | | MR SP3 l Costs $17/ SF $4/SF $15 1 1.50 10.00 20.00 7.00 REP 1 1.00 S 15-20.00 Z 1 1-15.00 OC3-10.00 6

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Paint-New (Table A) | Paint-Existing Type VOC | Appi | Prep Slip | Spec | Costs ~ Typ ~| VOC | Appl | Prep | Spec ID I IL I M300/ <340 1 S I SP10 B I STATE I 1.50 ~1 1 1 SP10 I I WBA/WBA l l l | | SP | SP3 | IN | IZNN | | PWAS l | 2.50 | REP IZNN | SP2 HL&AS l I I OC ~ ~aSulfonate 1 l | | T ~l l l l l | IA | IZ/WBA <350 | S | SP10 | B | AL T I R 1 350 | S. B ~SP10 | AL KS | IZ/WBA OR NO | MR | SP10 | _ | STATE | 2.00 | Z Rl ~P OC AEM OR 1 | MR 1 SP6 OR T STATE | | PU LIMIT I I I I I I ozr VBA OR PU | SP10 | KY | IOZ/MCU/P 350T s T sPlo 1 B T STATE 1 - | AM~ W 1 350 I B/BR/S PW 7 STATE | S l l l | | AM4~U/PU l l l LA | WBVA/WB <100 | MR | SP10 | | | ALE YD 350 | MR SP2/ | STATE A SP11 MD EM OR <350 MR SP10 STATE REF EP/PU srlo STATE | OR WBA l l l | | Z A .M/EM/PU | i 1 ~ i ~:~S SP3 MA lZ/EP/PU <420 MR SP10 B 0.09/L REP IZ/EP/PU <420 MR SP10 B | E `1/EM/PU l l ME IZ/EP/PU <420 MR SP10 B STATE REP AEM/AMCU <350 MR SP6 STATE ZMCU/MMCU/MMCU Ml | OZ/EP/PU | 350 | SP | SP10 | B | STATE | 3.00 | REI OZ/EP/~PU <350 | S SP10 | STATE MN | IZ/EP/PU | <350 | | SP10 ~/A iSTATE T 2.00 | REI OZ/EP/PU 420 | SP10 | STATE Costs $7.00 $8.00 $7.50 $1.50 $7.00 $1-1.50 =6.00 1.25/ sf REP 10-13 OC 3-5 l Z250R 1500/BEA R 10.00 5.00 9.00 5-9.00 7

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses | Paint-New (Table A) | Paint-Existing | Type VOC | App! | Prep | Slip | Spec | Costs | Typ ~| VOC | Appi | Prep | Spec L I I I I I | | VAF ES ~ SP6 ~ MO ~IZ/EP/PU <350 ~SR ~SP10 ~M300 ~ OCt aSULFONATE ~<350 ~SBR | SP2 | STATE MT IZ/EP/PU NO S SP5 DONT STATE REP IZ/EP/PU MR SP1 REQ OR 10 PAINT SP OC . l l l l l | SUR TOL.EP/WBEP l l l l NC WBAIWBA/ <240 S SP6 N/A STATE REP WBA/WBA/WBA <240 S B R SP6 STATE | | WBA l l l | | Z Ot ALKYDJALKYD | <350 | | SP3 l l l l l l l | OR iBA l l l l | ND T WPU/PU | MR | SP10 | - T STATE | T REP WPU/PU 1 | MR | SP6 | STATE | OC. EM/PU l l l l NE | IZ/WBAOR <360 | MR | SP10 N/A | STATE | | PP/( XPRIMER/WBA <360 | SP2 | STATE PU l l l l I I EPI {IMER/MCU NH IZ OR <420 MR SP10 B M300 OR REP ZNMCU/MMCU/ SP6 OZ/EP/PU NEPCOAT MMCU SP2 OR 3 MCU/MMCU/MMCU SP11 OR 6 NJ IZ/EP/PU MR SP10 B STATE 2.00 OZ/EP/PU <500 P MR SP10 NM I SP l l SP10 | UP | STATE | 3-4 | PU EM/PU SNPOT | S SP6 l NV | IZ/EP/PU <420 | S 1 SP10 l l l | EM M/PU | SANDBLA | | OH l l l l l l l l l l Costs 8

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses r Paint-New (Table A) ~Paint-Existing Type ~ VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep ~ Slip ~ Spec ~ Costs ~ Ty~: ~ VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep ~ Spec OK l IZ/EP/PU <350 | MR | SP10 B | STATE | | RE IZ/EP/PU <350 | OC EXPERIMENTAL <420 | OR | WIZ/PU | 350 | MR | SP10 | B | STATE | | RE] ZMCU/MCU ~<350 | MR | SP6 | STATE T I 1 1 7 7 1 7 oc ~MCU/ l <350 7 MR | SP6 | STATE PA l IZ/PU <420 | MR | SP10 | B | NEPCO] T | | IZ/1 P/PU <420 | MR REPSP10 | NJ/FLA AEM AEM PU OTHER l l l l l l l | OZ MCU/MCU ~| SP6 l Rl l OZOR <420 | MR | SP10 T N/A T STATE T I RE SPOC <360 | MR SPII | STATE iZtVARIOU AEM/AEMNARIOUS Is L I I I I I I I I SC | IZ/EM/PU | <350 | MR | SP10 | B | STATE | | EM EM | SP6 | STATE SD l iZ/PU 7 T MR 7 SP10 7 A l STATE 7 2.33 l RE~ SPZOCALK/ALK l MR S,PWSP6 T STATE TN | IZ/PU | <350 | S | SP10 | B | STATE | | RE IZ/ PU l l 1 7 | 7 I 1 1 T oc <3so | S SP2,PW T STATE TX l l l l l l l l l l UT | IZ/EP/PU | NO | MR | SP10 | | STATE | $3.00 | IZ~ P/PU NO | MR SP10 | STATE | | LIMIT | l l l l | LIMIT | l VA | IZOR l <420 7 MR l SP10 l B T STATEl)R | T RE~ IZOR NO | MR SPIOFOR T STATE, OZIVARIO SCEF OR OZNARIOUS LIMIT RUST SCEF US NEPCOAT SP Z OC ALKYD, REM NEPCOAT l l l l l l | | WB, AEP VE | IZ/EP/PU | <420 | MR | SP10 | B | STATE OR | | RE l l WA | IZ/EP/PU | <420 | S | SP5 | B | STATE | | OZ `4MCU/MCU NONE | SP SP6 | STATE Costs $12-15 5-6 REP 6.50 S 7.50 Z 7.00 OC 5.50 $4-5 $2-3 $7.00 8.00 3-5.00 $6-8 9

NCHRP Web Document 11, conDnued Synthesis 257 survey responses Paint - New (Table A) Paint - Existing [ | Type VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep Slip ~ Spec ~ Costs | Type ~ VOC ~ Appl ~ Prep ~ Spec Wl | iZ/EP/PU NO | MR | SP10 B | STATE | | OZ/E P/PU | <420 | MR | SP10 | STATE LIMIT l l l l l l l l l l WV | IZ/VAR NO | PA I | SP10 B | STATE | | REP ~Z/EM | NO | PAI | SP6 | STATE L I LIMIT l l l l l I I LIMIT I l l l l l l I | OC( SUFORPP | NO | PAI | SP2 | STATE ALB | WS l l l | | OC AMCUCA SULFONATE WBA BC | IZ/EP/PU l l l | | SEV OZ/EP/PU ~UF ~ IZ/EM M | S SPI0 ~ZP~EPIZ/EM/EM EM TIE MATCH ONT | OZ/VN N/A | MR | SP10 | AGENC | 51.50/S | RE OZ/VIV N/A | N/A SP6 | AGENCY | | M | SP ~ EM/AEM , NF | IZ/PUIPU | MR | SP10 l | AGENC' | NS SAS | MCU/MCU/ | MCU MB Costs 1 13.64/sm PROV FORC $5.00 10

NCHRP Web Document 11, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Z=zinc; MCU-moisture cure urethane; PU=polyurethane; IZ=inorganic zinc; OZ=organic zinc; A--aluminum; EM= epoxy mastic; WP=watff, E~epoxy; WBA=water home acrylic; WBVA= watt home vinyl acrylic;V=vinyl; 11

NCHRP Web Document 11, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Metallizing (Section I B) | Yes | Shop~ eld | Current | Areas | N~unber | Service | Type | Prep | Spray | Coated | Spec | Repair AK | N AL | N l l l l l l l l l l l AZ | N l l l l l l l l l I I _ CA | N I ~l l l l l l l I _ CT Y SIF Y BEAR 10 9 Zn,8-10 SP5 SP10 FLAME S LATEX AGENCY TOUCH l l l | G/B N&E l | | ~MIIL0 M ~| | EARC | S/P PP/PI I AWS | TUCPOOAF1 CO | N l l l l l l l l l l | _ DE | N l l l l l l l l l l I _ [D ~ N ~_ IL | N l l l l l l l l l I I _ Y F Y BEAR NEW Zr , 3 SP5 ELECT S P MAN REC I I I T l l | MIL | | ARC l l l IA | N l I ~l l l l l l l I _ KS | N l l l l I 1 l l l l I _ KY | N l I r l l l l l l I I LA | N l l l l l l l l l I I _ MD | N l | TEST SE( T l l | | MIL | | FLAME | SEPOX P | I _ MA | N l l l l l l l l l I I _ ME | Y | S l | BEAR | O | 7+ | Zn,8MIL | AW5 | MR | SPHEN' iLIC | ZN RICH | AWS Cost F 16.95 SqFt 35.00 50/B EAR 12

NCHRP Web Document 1 l, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Metallizing (Section I B) | Yes | Shop/Fi Id | Current | Areas | Number | Sa vice | Type | Prep | Spray | Coated | Spee | Repair | N l l l l l l l l l I _ MN | Y | S | BEAR | unk | 20+ | ZnA1 10 | SP10 | MR | NOT S Ol P | AGENCY | ZN MS | N I ~l l l l l l | | _ NC ~ N ~ S ~| JOINTS l ZnAI SP5 | F EA | Y | AGENCY l ND l l l l l l l l l l l I _ . BEAR Zn 8 MIL SP5 MR NOT S/P NH | Y ~T ~| JOINTS | 2 | NEW | Zn | SP5 l MR 1 s T | MET | NJ l | F 1 BEAR | 2 1 8YR | ZnZnAI | SP10 l EA 1 PPU T I I NM | N l l l l l l l l I ~ ~ TT ~ ~8 srso ~ ~L SE~U AGrNcY ~ OR | N PA ~ S/F ~ ~BEAR G 10 ~ UNK Zn 10 ML SP10 ~ FL EA NOT SU E AWS ~ OZ Rl , | Y | S l | G | 6 | 9 | Zn ZnA18 | SPP5 | FL | UN S & I | AGENCY | MR SD | N | S ~| BEAR l | 10 | ZnAI | SP10 | FLEA | NOT US iD | AWS | TU TN ~ N UT | N l l l l l l l l l l I ~ VA | Y | S l | BEAR, | 4, 1 UNDER | 7+seal,3+ | Zn,6 ML | SP10 | MR | SANDIS | AGENCY | META: BEAMS CONT . Cost 4.75 11.50 2X PAINT 13

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuect Synthesis 257 survey responses Metallizing (Section I B) I T | Cun ent | Areas | Number | Service| Type | Prep | Spray | Coated | Spec | Repair VE N S Y BEAR O OZn, 6 MIL SP5 SP10 FL ZnCr or AGENCY Zn EXPA DEV MANUF REC AWS PAINT WA IN I l T 1 T 1 1 1 1 1 1 Wl | N l l l l l l l l l | | - WV | Y | S l | POT BEAR | 0 | IN PROG l l l l | AWS ALB | Y | SF | BEAR l | =tSYRS | Zn7MtL | SP5 | NOT S | ASWCY S | METALLIZE | l l l I 101NTS l l | | ORP | GIS9 | GALCACON | _ BC Y F Y BEAR UNK >10 YRS Zn Zn/AI SP5 FL P EP/PU or V AGENCY RAILS PE! I I ~l l | | _ YT l l l l l l l l l l l | _ NB N ONT | N l l l l l l l l l l I _ NF | N l l l l l l l l l l l NS l l l l l l l l l I I _ SAS | N l l l I _ NT I I ~I T ~T T I 1 I | Cost 14

NCH~ ~b ~oc~e~ 11, co~i~ed S~s 257 ~ ~_~ ~^ I O ~1 ~m ~S-= ~mbin~on Fi@ld ~r Y O ~CF~LP~ ~5 ~S~6 I I 1 1 I'~G I 1 I Y ]- CF~S~S N 2~ tv IN 1 I I 1 1 1 1 1= 1- 1 1 1 1 1 I I 1^ I' I' I° I I I" I I t IY 1 I I I~S 1N T ~I^S~ 1 ~IN I 1 1 1 1 I 1 nE ~ 1 ~IN I I I I I I I N 1 ~IN I I I 1 1 1 I 1m I I I I I I I I 1 ~IN I I I I-~I I 1 ~Y N 1 25-S1~F B~S 55: . ~ I ~1N 1 1 1 I 1 1 I KS Y Y 10SP-S ~S~S~ ~BR B~S 1 I I ~I 1 I~ IN 1 ~I- LA N Y Y ~S~SBS N . ~12] BWS ^1 .O.l5db 1]9~L s~ 15

NCHRP Web Document 11, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses [ Galvanizing (Section I C) [ | Yes ~ Cum ~t | Numbr | Service | Combinatio' | Field | Length | Re,oair ME INSERTS 55' COLD GALV L MN | Y | Y | 0 | 20+ | CF INSERT B | N || PAINT [ MO T T T | | CF | N 11 [MS T T l l l I 1T MT | N T 1 7 T 11 | NC | Y T 7 7 r |T Zn RICH l ND | NN l l l l l ll | NE | Y | Y l | | INSERTS | N | | Zn RICH [NH 7Y 1 7 7 1 1 1 T INI TN 1 7 7 1 I T I ! NM | N l l l l l l l | OH | Y | Y | 40 50| 25+ | INSERTS [S BWS | Y | SOH | Zn P & METAL | OK | N l l l l l l l | OR l N r 1 1 1 7 1 7 IPA I TD I 1 1 T T T SC j N ~I i ~ | SD | Y | Y l l | C~N5~ rSBS | N | | COLD AND HOT | TN | N l l l I 1 7 7 ITX I I I I I 1 7 T IUT IN T I I I 1 7 T VA Y 5+ 3 YR BEAMS, CFR >40 Zn PT, COLD BOOS, BS GALV Cost UNK 0.32JLB 0.20/LB NOT AVAIL .30-.40 / LB 16

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Galvaruzing (Section I C) EM ZRICH TOUCH UP r Yes | Oamnt | Number | Service ~ Combination Field LN l l l l l l BEAM 104' BEARINGS 40' ~1 1 1 1 1 1 Y | N | | CF INSERTS BS | N | 10 MET t I Y I NONE | 30-50 | RAILS | >N | 4U | Y | 100 | 15 | GIRDERS | Y | 6(y BEARINGS _ I Y 1 20 1 30 1 N 1 N 1 3o CF= Cross frames; BS = bearing steel; BWS = bearing weathering steel Repair I Cost _ wi WS WV WY ALB STATE GALVACON OR METAL NONE 0.40 BC PEI QUE YT NB ONT NF NS SAS MB NT UNK 0.25 GALV 0.75/ LB Wea~ering Steel (Section I D) . | Use | Painted | An~as T FHWA | Number 1 ~ o.Perf Set 1 Pn~blems 1 No.P~fUnsat r Remedial Act | Morato~ wn L AK | N l l | N | <12 l | RTM l 11 | REP PT 17

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Weathenng Steel (Seciion I D) | Use | Painted | Areas | FHWA | Number | No Perf Sat | Problems | No.Perf Unsat | Remedial Act | ALT T 1 w z I | | LL BUT I | RTM | I EXP. TIED ARCH | AR | N l l l l l l l l AS 1 Y 1 UP 1 1 1 337 1 17 1 N 1 0 1 N CN | Y | UP | WZ l | 190 | {5 | RTMPR | 5 | NONE CO Y UP Z Y 42 42 DE | Y | P UP | W l | 30 | ) | RTM l I | NONE GA | N | UP | | N | 100 | )0 l l l IL Y Z 162 soo/O RTM PR soo/O IOZ/V | iN | 1 UP T BEAR r T 1 T T IO | Y | P | Z l | 20 | LL | PR | ONE REPLACED KS | Y | P l l | 30 | 5 | PACK R J | 5 IZ KY | Y | Y l | N | 3 UP | | >RUST l l P CSUF LA P UP W Z Y 35 20 RTM PR MD Y P UP Z 223 OK EX ITS RTM ME | Y ~T I N | 100 | 8 | AREAS | P BLSC MA P UP Z ALL Ml | Y | P l l | 500 | | RTM, Pl . | REPL STEEL MN P UP W Z ALL MINOR PROB MO P UP W Z Y 52 ALL PR IZ PAINT MS = ~ ~ ~ MT T T I | sof | ,LL l l Moratonum N N N N N N N N N NIfp N N N N Y N 18

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Weathenng Steel (Sff:tion I D) l | Painted | Areas| FHWA | Number | o.Perf Sat | Pn~bl~ns | No.Paf Unsat | Remedial Aa NC | Y | P l| Y MOD | O52 | 52 | N ND UP N 10 NE 1 Y 1 P 11 N 1 77 1 7 1 1 1 NH Y P UP W ZY HUN- ALMOST ALL PR SMALL NONE | DREDS NM| Y | UP NV| N NYI Y I UP I I N 1 800 1 00 1 1 1 OH Z 275 250 RTM PR 25 PZ EM OK | Y | UP l | | 19 | 8 | RTMPR l 1 | OZ OR | Y | UP l l l <10 | | Y | I PIT CORR PA | Y | PUP l l | >100 | LLL | n SC Y UP Y 2 2 0 SD Z 1 2 2 2 YRS OLD TN P UP W 10 10 N TX UT UP 15 7 RTM W PRF MEMBR DECK AND W Y RTM Sl CT 30 VA | Y | P UP | W Z l | 300+ | 150+ | LOSS | PAINT, REPLACE | VE | Y | P l l l | dOST | ~T RTM | UNK P IZ EP PU Wl UP Z 45 ALL WS W 22 20 RTM PEN EP WV | Y | Y | Z | 10 | | RTM,P! WY Y UP Y 25 25 Mo~tonum N N N N N N - _ N N N N N N N N N N N 19

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Weathering Steel (Section I D) [ | | Painter | Areas | FHWA | N~unber | r o.PafSat | P~bl~ns | No.PerfUnsat | Remedial Act ALB UP 75 73 BC Y ~ Z UNK UNK UNK N P IZ/PU PEI = L QUE L YT NB I Y I P I W I 1 31 1 1 ] 1 R ~1 21 1 P~ ONT | Y | Y | Z | N | 20 | ' D | N NF = ~ ~=~= Mo~torium N N N N N 20

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Powder Coating (Section I E) | Use | Cum t | Typeofmember | Type of powder | Thickness | Repair | T'' letoFi~ ~ AL| N I I I I I I N L AR| N I I I I I I CAN CTN CON . | DE| N I I I I I I GAN D IN I I 1 1 I T= I L | N I I I I I I IN I Y I N | G B DIA | EPOXY l l | S ILL GOOD I N I I I I I I KS Y N DETOUR ACROW TR EPOXY . . MD Y N G/B DIA TUNNEL EP & POLY 10 =2 MR M~ED CEILING PANELS | N I I I I I I Cost 21

N ClIFUP TVeb Ijocu~nen~ ll~conIi ~ cd Syntbesk 257 survey responses tang (Soon I ~ ~_1 ~ ormolu- ~ of ~1 ~at Time ~ Fig n1 lamI- 1 1 1 I I I N H0N ~S . It1 ~1 I I 1 I I I~1N 1 1 I 1 1 1 ~1N I 1 1 1 1 I N N ~1N 1 1 I 1 I 1 N 1N 1 1 I I 1 1 ~I ~I I I I I 1 0HN N ~I IY I~w~~s~s I ~I 1 PA N N SC N s~ . 1 1 1 1 I I N ~Y Y ~ ~_ ~-~1~ 1N 1 1 I I I N ~1 22

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Powder Coating (Section I E) Time to First | | Use | Current | Type of member | Type oPpowder | Thickness | Rcpair | Ma~r~t N l | N l l l l l l NB N ONT N NF N I NS~T OF= ~I Cost 23

NCH~ Weh ~oc~e~ 1 1, co~ed Sy~es~ 237 s~ey ~onses ~n~ (S-on F) ~I ~@ ~mbin~on I S-l Y Y T Y l G Y Y Y G P Y N G. P AS Y Y Y GPWS CA Y Y ~P Y N Y CO Y Y Y Y N . . Y Y N Y Y Y N . N Y P Y Y IO Y Y Y G ~S KY Y Y LA Y Y N Y Y N N Y Y Y N Y Y N G P -1 Y Y Y Y Y Y Y N Y Y Y N Y Y Y Y Y Y 24

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Concrete (Section F) Use Prefer Alternate Combination Steel MN N G MO G P MS MT SITE SP P WS NC ND Y _ _ N P WS G NH N G NJ N G P NM NV N NY y <100 OH Y SPAN L G P WS M OK . OR G P PA N N G SC N SD G UT Y N Y N VA VE N WI G WS N N P WS WV N G P Replaced Y Y Y _ Y _ N N Y N y Y AND THE OPPOSl l y y y y y y y Y Y Y 25

NCH~ Mob Pocket 1 1, coated Sots 257 ~ ~ and (S-on F) P^ ~_- ~mbln~on S-1 . Y N Y P PUB Y Y e # BC Y Y Y KWS,~ HI Y Y N ~h WS Y Y N N KWS Y Y N NS SAS Y Y ~1~ Y Y Y Y Y Y N 26

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Expected Life Section G) Paint New Repaint AK 25 yr 25 yr AL 25Y 15-20 AZ 30 30 AR CA 20 20 CT 25 25 CO DE 20-25 20-25 FL 15-20 15-20 GA 20 20 HI 15 10 ID IL 20 20 1N 15 Y 10Y KS 30 20 KY LA 2~25 20-25 MD 15-20 Y 12-15 MA 20 Y | Metai | Galv | Wr~ering | Powder | Conuetc | Determine T 1 1 1 7 25 yr 1 75 1 N 1 1 75yr 1 POLICY 75 | 75 1 1 75 1 COST COMP | 50 1 1 1 50 1 POLICY 1 1 1 1 1 20 POLICY 50 N 50 60 50 POL & DESIGNER POLICY 75 75 POLICY 20 60 50 POLICY 25 Y 50 Y 50 Y N 50 Y DESIGNER ~POLICY 20 50 20 50 POLICY POLICY 15 N BR PT TEAM POLICY Maintenance Costs Overcoat 25yr 10-15 N Y Y 5 1~12 10 10 10 Y y 10 5+ 5-10 M y y y y y y Y CONC SHORT SPAN LONG--WS y y CONC IF POSS 27

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Expected Life Section G3 20 1S 20 8+ 15 8 10 lO-15 5-7 15 NOT YET 20 10 Paint New | Repaint ME 70 Y | 15 Y MI 45 Y | 30 Y MN 25 Y | 15 Y MO 15 l 15 MS 1 MT ~ 50 1 50 NC 30 25 ND 30 20 NE `10 30 NH 25+ 20+ NJ 25 20 NM 25 NV 50 N 25 UNK NY 20 OH 20 Y 15N OK 30Y 20Y OR 25-50 Y 25-50 PA ~ 20-25 15+ RI 20 Y 20 NOT YET SC 20 12 3~35SD 20 20 TN 20-25 20 TX 20 N 20 N | Metal | Galv | V eathering | Powder | Connete | Detennine T30 T30 13~: 1 Tso 1 15 Y 50 POL & DES 15 Y 30 Y 30 Y 75 N 75 Y POLICY 8 60 60 POL & DES 75 75 POLICY 30 40 75 25 75 DESIGNER 5 ~ 1 1 30 1 POLICY 50 50 50 BOTH ST AND CONC ALT 30 POLICY 40 . POLICY 50 POLICY 50+ POLICY POLICY 30 30 50 N 50 POL & DES COST 25 NOT YET 40 Y DESIGN 80 75 75 75 POLICY POLICY 50 N 50 N POLICY Maintenance Costs Overcoat 15 Y y y y y y y y y Y Y Y Y Y Y LOW COST N Y Y 28

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continues! Synthesis 257 survey responses Expecied Life Section G) Paint New Relxunt VA VE WI 20 20 WA 30 15 WV 20 15 WY 25 Y 25 Y ALB 20 Y 20 Y BC 20-30 20-30 PEI QUE YT NB 25 25 ONT 20 N 20 NE 20 10 NS SAS 30 30 MB NT | Metai | Galv | Weathering | Po~vder | Conc~ete | Detennine 1 1 1 1 1 _ 75 75 75 75 POL & COST 30 75 50 50 DESIGN 15-30 30-50 STR Lll;E STR LIFE BOTH 50 30 70 POLICY 20 50 DESIGN 3 ~13 ~1 30h 1 50 20+ POLICY . : Maintenance Costs Overa~at 15 N 25 - 15-25 N N 25 20 y y NFIS NOPOLICY LAB = STEEL MARINE = CONC 29

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC Section [1, Question 1-14) | Accept | ~ C | Cert | PU ,ISHED | Proficienc | lAs | New | hnpact | QA | hnsp Cont | SSPC Inter~st | Partnering L I I I I Iytest I I I I I I I | AK | TCCTR | I SUAL | ACT.LAB | N | N | N | SPEC Y FOR | N N | Y L I I | RESULT I I I I | | n | ENFORCE ACCEPT | | AL | C AL l | _ | N | N | IA | N | | Al | VIS INSP SP N | N | NOT l l l l l l l l l | ENF I I FORM, | AZ | CTR l l l l l | Y | Y l 11 | SPEC ENF QCQA | N N | Y | AR | TALCTRC | I iSUAL | AL | Y | Y | CA | T,AL | I tSUAL l | N | | Y | | Al I TEST l l | CT | AL,CTR | I IOQC | NEPCOAT | N l | N | Y | | Alll | SPECENF QC | Y Y | Y [ CO | C,AL l | N | N= | N | N | | Al | SPEC ENF TO QA | N N | Y | DE T TCAL | I ISUAL | VARIES T N | N T I | | NONE T SPECENF N | Y Y l FL T,C, USUAL USU Y Y Y N Al II SPEC ENF N Y Y Y l | CTR,AL l l l l l l l l l l l | GA l A,LC, | ISUAL | USUAL | Y l | Y | Y | N | Al | N | Y Y | N Hl | C | ONE | NOT SP | N | Y | N | Y | MUST | OTHER | SPEC ENF TO | Y | Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 IL T,C, USUAL PERF N Y Y N AI QA QA N N Y l | CTR l l l l l l l l l l | | | IN | T C AL CTR l l | N l | N l | | Al | SPEC ENF | Y | Y | IA CTR, C VARIES N N N Y N AI SPEC ENF N NY Y | AL l l l l l l l l l l | | KS T C AL USUAL N Y N N AI II SPEC ENF N N Advant Y y y MIX RES y y y y 30

NCHRP Web Document 11, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses KY LA MD MA ME MI MN MO MS MT NC ND NE NH NJ NM NV NY OH OK OR PA Rl Accept T,C T,AL C CTR AL T C CTR AL CAL C CTR AL TCCTRAL TCCTRAL TC TAL C~ . CAL TCAL T C CTR AL TCAL TCCTRAL CALF SAMP TCCTR CTR TCAL T C CTR AL TCCTR QC USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL . NONE USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL USUAL N1A USUAL USUAL USUAL QA/QC Section II, Question 1-14) I N QP2 N N 31 N DONT EXP ANY N N Insp SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF SPEC ENF

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC Section 11, Queshon 1-14) | Accept l 2C | Cert | Pt {ISHED | Proficienc | IAS | New | Impact | QA | Insp Cont | SSPC Inter~t | Partnering L I I I I Iytest I I I I I I I ANCE l l | SC | C AL l l | N l | N | Y | N | Al 11 l l | _ SD C AL NONE NONE N N Y Y N AI SPEC ENF Y GAL N Y Y A'TIA I l l I INACCD | l | TN l l l | N l l | Y | | Al 11 | SPEC ENF N | N Y | Y | TX | UT | C T CTf< AL | JSUAL | LIMITED | N l | Y | Y | TO QA l 11 | PQROCESS PLAN l l | VA | T C CTR AL | JSUAL 7 USUAL T I I : 7 1 | Al n 1 SPEC ENF ~ Y QC 1 | Y IVE I r T I~L 1 7 1 7 1 ~I r I | Wl | C CT: ~ONE T NONE ~| N | N T Y | N T Al | | Y | N Y | Y WA I T C CTR AL I ~SU I AS REQ | N l | N | Y | N | Al | | Y | N I Y I Y AL USU ALL N N Al II QA ENF QC N | WY | T | JSU | NO CERT | N l | N | Y | NONE l l | | N | N | Y | ALB | TAL ~ L)SU | N TN| N | N/, ~ T N | NONE | Al | SPEC ~ QPI | Y | Y T BC AL USU N N N AI PEI I r 1 17 I I I I I I I r 1 ~ QUE l l l ll l l l l l l l | | _ NB | T CTft | USU | SAME | Nl | N | Y | N/A | Al 11 | | N | N | N | Y ONT | T C CTf< AL | USU | NOT USU T T | N | N T I Al II | QA ~N | N | N NF | AL | USU l | N | N | N | N | N | Al | SPEC ENF | N | N | N | N NS SAS | AL | VAR l | N | N | N | N | | Al | SPEC ENF | N | N | N | N MB NT Advant y y N N Y Y Y Y 32

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC - Environmental and Workff (Section II, Question 15-19) Environmental Woricer | None | Soil l Air | Water | Vsible | Coo~clor | Agency | Train Emissions Agency | TSP | PM10 AK FORMAL OSHA FORMAL OSHA OSHA NACE | TEt | TEt l AL Y Y OSHA AGENCY N/A [ AZ l | Y | Y l | Y | OSHA&SPEC | AGENCY&SPEC | OSH ~ AR CONT RESP FOR CONTR RESP AGENCY RESP MAINT PER REC. TR IN | ALL ASPECTS l l l l l l l | LEA ) AEIATEME~IT CA Y Y Y Y Y OSHA AGENCY AGENCY PLAN CT | | Y | Y | Y | Y | Y | STATE SPEC | STATE LHPP | NA( ECERT LEAD AWARNESS TRAIN CO Y Y Y Y OSHA AGENCY 2 DAY TR | DE | l | Y | Y | EXPLNSPEC | AGENCY PLAN | PEI ~flLIARWI~ | | ONHAZ I I EtEC LILATIONS FL OSHA AGENCY NIH BRlNSP. COURSE l l l l l l l l l | NA( ESSPC | GA l l | Y | N | N | Y | CONT.CERT | AGENCY l | H1 | N | N | N | N l | N | CIH | SAME ASCONT | NOI E | ID l l l l l l l l l IL Y Y Y OSHA CONT ASSIST AGENCY TR ILE¢SP PERSONNEL FOR | IN l l | | Y l | Y | OSHA | AGENCY PLAN | AGI NCYTEt | IA l | Y | Y | Y | OSHA | AGENCY | INK OUSEOSHA Train. Con-tractor OSHA PRIOR EXPERENCE N/A MANY PROGRMS IN PLACE CONTR RESP LEAD AWARENESS TRAINING 2 DAY TR QP2 QP1 QP2 SSPC COMPETENT PER OP2 OR GA LEAD ABATEMENT TR SESSION SSPC OSHA CONT TR OSHA OSHA 33

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, cont~nuect Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC - Environrnental and Worker (Section II, Question 15-19) i I Envl~onrnental | Worka None Soil Air Water Visible Contractor Agency Train. Emissions Agency l l l | TSP | PM10 l l l l l | KS I I 1 I T I | OSHA 1 AGENCY | HA' MAT IstAID | KY I I I I T I | OSHA IN SPE ' 1 AGEl4CY TR 1 FHY 'A IN HOUSE LA Y VISIBLE ESCAPE OSHA 1N SPEC AGENCY TRAINING NOT UP TO DATE MD Y Y Y Y Y CIH PLAN & AGENCY PLAN ST TR CERT 40 HOUR BLOOD TEST COURSE MA l l | Y | Y | N | Y | OSHA | AGENCY TR l ME Y Y Y Y Y OSHA& ME AGENCY OJT & CLASS RM REQUIREM. TRAIN MI N N N N N N TCLP OSHA AGENCY LEAD WASTE _ HANDLING CLASS MN Y Y T H AGENCY NO EST EXCEPT l l l l l l C | OS A || OSEA MO . Y Y TCLP OSHA IN SPEC AGENCYSTOP PROG MS l l l l l l l MT | N l T 1 1 1 OSHA T AGENCY | NO IE NC Y Y OTHER VIS EPA OSHA AGENCY PLAN EXP & 32 HR TR l l l l l l | REQUIRED l l ND N Y N N Y OSHA OSHA NONE REQUIRED NE | Y l l l l l l l l NH N N AT CER Y OSHA COMPL CONT TO TR NACE CERT l l | LTESAFOR l l l | PLAN REQ | AGENCY | CO 4SULTANT1145P NJ N Y Y ONLY IF PAY ONLY IF PAY LHPP AS PAY AGENCY PLAN TR BY CIH ITEM ITEM ITEM NM NO TEST BUT N N N N N OSHA REQ IN AGENCY PLAN MONTHLY SAFETY REQ COMPL SPEC MEET & SPECIAL TR NV N Y Y Y Y Y CONT SUBM HAZMAT HAZMAT PLA FOR APP Train. _ Con-tractor CONT RESP NONE 3 YR COATING EXP IN HAZ MATLS NACE 1 FOR CONTRACTOR 1926.62, .59 31OCMR 30.00 OSHA REQUUIRED TR NONE NONE OSHA AND SSPC REQ TP COMPLY WITH OSHA OSHA ESS THE SAME LEAD EXP TR AS NEEDED HAZMAT 34

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC - Environmental and Worker(Section II, Question 15-19) Environmental Workff | None | Soil |Air | Water | V sible | Contractor | Agency | Trai' Emissions Agffncy | TSP | PM10 l l l l l NY | N | N | Y | Y | N | N | SEP PAY rrEll | WRITTEN | LEA)SP TRAINING WORKER AGENCY PLAN SAFETY & TESTING OH | N T N | N | N T TCLP | OSHA | AGENCY T cot SULTR GLASSES OK T N N N N OSHA LEAD IN AGENCY LEAD QPI QP2 A BONUS 3126 TESTING NO FORMAL REQ OR I I I ~1 1 T OSHA | AGENCY 1 OSI A FED&STATE PA N Y OSHA 1926.62 BLOOD TEST ON GOING CONSULT l l l l l l | | CON r PROV I TR/ INING Rl l l l l l | | OSHA | OSHA l SC Y Y Y Y Y QP1 CONTRACTED QP1 OUT SD | | N T 1 N I I 1 A T M~L T NO IE TN Y Y OSHA OSHA CHANGE TO REQ OSHA TR TX | I 1 1 1 1 1 r I UT Y N N N ST SPECS AGENCY PLAN NICET & CET BY l l l l l l l l I MA r'LSLAEI VA Y IF Y OSHA & CIH AGENCY PLAN IND TR AS NEEDED RELEASE REQ. PLAN FOR CONST. lNSP VE N N Y N N OSHA & VT OSHA & VT LEAD AWARENESS HEALTH HEALTH Wl l l l l l | Y | OSHA | OSHA l WA N CONTR RESP CONT RESP FOR LHPP FOR PROTECT ST PERS OF WORKERS WV QP1 QP2 AGENCY BI TR GUIDELINES WY Y Y Y Y N OSHA & EPA NOT NONE NECESSARY Tlain. Con-tractor OSHA REQUIRED TR CONSUL TR CLASSES FOR CONTRACT QA PERSON QP1, QP2 APPROVED OSHA FED & STATE OSHA 1926.62 OP1 NONE OSHA TR NOT VERIFIED NICET OSHA & CIH PLAN NONE LHPP QP1 QP2 EPA ~ c

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continucc! Synthesis 257 survey responses QA/QC ~ Envin~nrnental and Worker (Section 11 Question 15-19) Envin~n~nental | Worker | None T soil T Air T Water | Visible | Contractor | Agency | Tn~i' Emissions Agency l l l | TSP | PM10 l l | ALB l T T I T | YTCLP | CAN OSHA T CAN OSHA | NM El!l | BC | | Y l l | Y | | WHhflS | WHMIS | NM EmWCBWHMIS | PEi l l l IQUE T ~1 I 1 1 1 1 1 ~ YT l ~I l NF | N | N | N | N | N | Y | ONTSAF | SAFETY OFF | IN! OUSENACE NS SAS | N MB NT Train. Con-kactor TECHNICAL QUAL EXP PLUS WCB WHMIS REQ COURSES RAlEl) 36

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Funding (Section m) j ~ FHWA ~ Bonds ~ Special Use Taxes ~ Genend Fund ~ Capital Ouday ~ Privitization ~ Tolls ~ O AK VERY LlhIITED AZ Y Y AR Y Y CA | Y l | Y l | Y | | Y CT ~ ~ GAS TAX DE FL GA Y Y HI Y Y . IL Y Y Y IN IA KS Y KY L'A MD Y Y BUDG ME MI Y ~ Const vs Maint Y Y Y Y _ Y Y Y Y N y N y N N N y N y y 37

NC~P Web Document ~1, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Funding (Section m) FHWA Bonds Special Use Taxes Gen~l Fund Capital Outlay Privitization TollsOther MO Y Y Y MS MT MAINT CONST = | =STAIE | STATE & NC Y ND NE NH | Y l | Y NV ~ Y ~ = ~= OH Y Y OK OR | Y _ ~1 ~ 1 1 1= TN Y YNEW Y MAIN 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 UT VA VE WA | Y l l l l 1 ~3 Const vs Maint y y y y N _ N N N N Y Y Y ISTEA Y Y Y Y Y N N 38

NC~ Web Docker- 1 1, complied Sy~es~ 257 sat responses Funded (S=lon ~ 1 1- I ~ Use III ~ ~ ~ Y Y Y Y tin 1 1 1 1 I I I I BC Y Y 1 ~I I I I 1 I I I Q~ Y Y Y Y Y Y NS ~s~s 1 1 I 1 I 1 1 1 tam I 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 tam 1 I 1 I I I 1 1 ~1 ~ . n1 Y - N Y Y Y 39

NC~ ~b ~oc~- 1 1, co~i~ed S~s 257 ~ ~ ~i~ Ch~a (~n ~lnd ~ndn_ ~CS ~ S1~1 W_~ Y Y Y I" IN I I I" 1" N N N N CA Y Y 1Y I IY I I- 1N CO Y N N Y Y N N Y N ~ 1 Y 1 Y I Y I I Y I _ Y Y Y Y N N Y N N KS Y Y N N KY Y Y Y Y N N LA Y Y N N N N ~ Y Y Y Y WS N N Y Y Y N N I Y I Y 1 ~I 1 B= ~T~ N ~ wo~s~ _~ BY A~Y F~ 40

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Design Criteria (Section W) | Jointless | Continuous| LLCS | I p Steel | Wa~Tanty| CwTent MN| N l| Y | . | N| N MOY YY Y NN | Y l| Y l I | N| _ NC N ND| Y l| Y | | N| N NE N NHj ~ Y ~WS ~ Y ONE~ N NJ NN NMN NN NV | N l | Y | . | N | N NY | Y l | Y | . | N | _ OH | Y l | Y | | N | N OK THIS SPRING OR Y PA Y Y Y Y 100 YR N N DESIGN Rl | N l| Y | . | N| N SC N SD N TN Y N TX UT 1 11 1 11 _ VE N Benefits RED MANP . WPROOF JTS, DRAINS BELOW STEEL CONT MAY NOT BE IN BUS IN FUT. FIGHT ABOUT LOOPHOLES AND CONT MEANING FOR ON YR AFTER ACCEPT ONLY I YR N 41

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Design Criterla (Section IV) lointless Continuous LLCS Rep Steel Warranty T Current N | N ~ WA | Y l I T T I WV N WY . N ALB BC L Y N DESIGN BEING DONE WITH MAIN IN MIND YT NB ONT Y N N N N N NS SAS | Y l l l | N | N MB NT Benefits 15-20 YR WITH 2 YR MAINT BOND N N 42

Maintenance ~pes (Section V 1~, 10) BMS Imple Irnped PM RM DF CDM REM REH PRM MM ~ - Y ~Y ~Y ~Y ~Y Y ~Y' CA ~ Y ~ Y ~ ~ Y Y ~ DE T N T N T LACK OF STAFF r | Y | Y T Y I T T I GA 1Y 1Y 1 1 1Y 7Y 1Y T 7Y I 1Y | N | N ~ ~ ~| N | N | Y | Y | N ~ N IL | Y | Y I I I | Y | Y | Y I _ T ~ 1 1 1 1 1 I N T N 1 N | N IA Y ~Y Y Y Y KS ~ N ~ N W9, 1 :=1 ~- MA | Y I 1 Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MD I Y I Y I BSR ~LY I Y 1 Y I Y I Y I Y I Y I Y ME | Y | Y | 1 1 Y 1 Y | Y | N | Y | N | Y ~ Time l.5YR UNK IMMED AS FUNDS BECOME AVAIL. 1-2 YR 3 YRS 1 YR VARIES 1 YR 1 YR Y 5 1 YR 2YR 43

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Ml MN MO ND NE NH NJ N.M. NV NY OH OK OR PA RI _~ TN TX Impel Gail l leg DATA UNTO BASE FOR MORE ACCESS DATA COLL PONTIS NOT READY BUILDING DATA BASE . STARTED JUST BEGUN UNDER DEV PM by N N I N I N I N I N Maintenance types (Section V 1~, 10) Time 1 YR 3 YR I VARIES . DEPENDS FUNDS FIXED 1-2 YR 1 YR VARIES 3 YR .5 TO 3 YRS NEED DEPENDS I VARIES

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance types (Section V 14, 10) | BMS | Irnpl' | lmped | PM | FtM | DF | CDM | I;tEM | REH | PltM | MM L VE | Y | Y l | | Y | Y | | N | N | N | N LWI IY IY I TY rY IY I 7 IY 1 IY LWA IY IY 7 T rY 1Y TY 7 I TY 7Y twv 1 1 7 TY rY 1Y IY IY IY IY 7Y WY | N I T T r 1 T T 1 1 7 ALB | Y | N T RESOURCES T r 1 T T 1 T 7 ~ BC | Y | N | UND DEV | PEI QUE I 1 7 1 1 7 1 1 1 1 ~ IYT I I 1 7 1 1 7 1 T I 1 1 !NB IY IY 1 TY TY TY 7Y 1Y IY TY IY I | ONT | Y | Y | SIEELONLY l l l l l l | Y | Y l | NF | N | | ErUNDS ~I T I ~I ~1 1 INS I T I 1 T: I I I 1 7 1~I L SAS | Y ~T 1 T I 1 1 1 7 1 1 | MB | NT Time DEPENDS 2YR lMO -2 YR .5 TO 2 YR 5YR 1-10 YR EX EMERG 1 YR 1-5 YR 5-9 YR VARIABLE >9MO 45

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Issues Section (Section V Question 11) Env Issues OSHA Funding Uncertainty High costs AK 1 1 1 AL I I I 2 AZ 1 1 3 AR 1 1 2 3 3 CA CT 1 1 2 2 1 CO . DE 1 1 1 1 1 FL 1 2 . GA 1 1 2 2 2 HI 3 2 1 2 2 ID IL 1 2 2 IN 1 1 3 2 IA 2 2 1 KS* 3 1 2 2 2 KY 1 1 1 1 2 MA 1 1 1 2 1 ME 2 1 1 3 2 MI 3 1 2 3 2 Other 1 EXP LIFE OF SIR . 1 MAIN SIR 46

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Issue; Section (Section V ,Ouestion 11) Env Issues OSHA Funding Uncertainty High cost MN I I I 3 1 MO 1 2 1 3 1 MS l l l | | = MT NC 2 2 ND 2 2 2 NE NH NJ 1 1 NM 1 1 1 1 1 NV 1 2 3 2 NY 2 2 1 3 2 OH 2 2 2 OK* 2 2 2 OR PA 2 2 2 Rl SC 1 1 1 2 1 SD 2 2 1 TN 1 2 2 1X UT 2 VA VE 2 2 WI _ WA 1 2 WV 2 1 2 3 2 Other IN1EG. I PRIOR ISSUES 47

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Issues Section (Section V Question 11) Env Issue; OSHA Funding Uncertainty High costs WY 2 2 1 2 1 ALB 1 1 2 1 BC 1 1 1 PEI QUE err NB 1 1 2 2 1 ONT 2 2 1 2 1 NF 3 3 2 3 1 NS SAS 2 2 1 MB NT Other *VALUES ADJUSTED TO FIT SCALE 48

NCH~ Huh Docket 1 1, coated Sy~esk 257 sty rc~onses Ghan_= Few (~on ~ Moon 1~ ~1 ~Subs_ Ion Fl=ibiliV ~_mOndidon In_ Hand 1 2 ] ]1 1 2 2 1 1 1] 2 1 1 ~2 2] 1 : I: ~ ~ I] I ~ I1 ~1 1 2_ ] 11 1 2 CO . DE 1 2 ] ] ]1 1 1 1 2 ] ]~ ~2 ~] 1 ] ]1 ] 2 ] 2 2 ]2 1 2 ] 2 ] ]1 ] ~] ] ] ] ]1 ] ~1 1 2 2 ]1 1 KS' 2 2 1 ] KY 1 2 ] ] ] 1 LA 1 1 1 ] ~1 2 ~2 2 2 ] ] 1 ~ ~1 1 1 11 1 T I 1 ] 1 2 ] ] 1 1 2 2 ] ] ~1 2 S~- 2 2 2 2 2 ] ] 2 2 2 49

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Factors (Section V, Question 12) ent type Subst te Confi tion Fl xibili T In n Condition Contarn l | | Cond | | e ty |e pomade l l MN 1 3 1 MO 1 1 3 1 2 MS MT 1 3 3 2 NC 1 1 3 . 1 2 3 ND 1 1 2 1 2 2 NE 1 2 2 2 1 2 3 NEf 1 1 1 1 3 1 3 13 1 2 1 2 1 ' _ NM 3 2 2 3 3 1 3 3 NV 3 3 2 3 1 3 3 NY 3 3 3 1 3 3 OH 3 3 3 1 3 3 OK 1 2 3 1 2 3 OAR ~: ~3 2 ~2 1 ~2 ~ SC 2 2 3 2 1 1 1 2 SD 1 1 3 1 2 3 TN 1 1 3 1 2 2 UT 1 1 2 1 2 2 1 VA ~ 2 ~ l ~ WA 2 3 WV 1 23 1 2 Surf Prep 3 3 3 2 2 2 50

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Factom (Section V, Question 12) | | Cunent Type | ' ibshate | Conf~gw8tion | Flexibiliq, | Ternperah~re | Condition | Contarn WY 1 2 3 3 2 Tl 1 ALB 1 1 2 2 1 1 OC 3 BC 3 3 2 3 3 PEI QUE Yr . . NB 2 2 ONT 2 3 1 3 2 2 NF 2 1 2 3 3 1 2 SAS 3 3 3 3 1 MB ~ NT Surf Prep 3 1 3 51

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses AK AL AR AS CA CN CO DE FL GA HI ID IL IN IO KS* KY LA MA MD ME MI Maintenance Mitigation Factors Section V, Question 13) Repaint vs Overcoat 2 2 2 2 Urgency 2 3 2 1 2 _ _ ] 3 2 2 2 2 Demoliiton 2 2 _ 3 _ 3 _ I 1 1 2 2 3 2 2 1 1 1

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses I MO I M.R I MT 1 Nr) NH Nl NM NV On PA RT .~r sn TN TX Ia VA VF WT WS wv Maintenance Mitigation Facton; Section V, Question 13) 1 1 l 2 2 2 2 Fmic~inn~ 53 l 2 2 _ 2 _ = _ l _ _ _ 3 2 Repaint vs Overcoat 1 1 1 Urgency _ 2 2 . 2 . . 2 _ 3 _ 2 2 _ 2 3 _ 2 l _ 2 _ _ 3 3 3 . . 2 l 2 _ 2 _ _ 2 _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ 1 1 2 _ 3 Danoliiton _ _ _ 2 2 2 2 l _ _ I_ 2 _ _ _ 2 _ 3

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Mitigation Factors Section V, Question 13) [ | Member type | ~ or Life | Lifeof | R coat | Replace | App ·ethods | Emissions | F' h~reMaint | Limit | Toler-ance | ~ 't~ | Urgency ~ ALB ~3 ~2 ~2 ~3 ; I ~2 2 2 3 3 | QUE | YT NB 1 2 | ~1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 2 ONT 1 ~1 3 | 3 | 3 1 1 1 1 1 3 1 2 NF 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 3 1 3 ~ SAS 1 2 1 1 1 2 1 1 3 1 3 1 3 1 1 1 3 ~1 1 | NT Demoliiton 3 3 3 _ 2 54

NCHRP Web Document ~ i, continuec! Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Policy (Section V, Question 1~21 Policy Replace vs Paint Zone & Spot Pt Need Priontization Waste Reduction Solid Hazardous AK N N N N AL REP OC N N AR N N AZ Y REP N Y AR AR N N CA CT AR AD CO YOC RN N N N N N DE Y OC N Y AR AD N N N RN FL REP OC N AR GA REP N N AR AD Y REP N Y AR N N ID IL OC AR AD IN OC REP N N AR AD IA N AR AD KS REP N N AR N Y Y KY N N AD AR N LA N N AR N N MA COMB N AD AR N MD N ~D DEP ON COST Y AR AD Y Y Y EVAL BENE Recyclable N PERMIT N N _ N Y Y Y N Y Y _ y y N y y 55

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Policy (Section V, Ouestion 1~21 Policy Replace vs Paint Zone & Spot Pt Need Prioriti7ation Wast. : Reduction Solid Ha_ardous ME REP OC R CONT OPT Y AR AD Y N Y N Ml REP AR AD Y MN PREF Y Y AR AD Y ~ Y Y REP MO | MAINT | Y | N | AR AD | N | Y | Y TOECD MS MT N N N N N NN NC REP CONT OPT AD AR l ND Y WITH N AR AD N YY CONCRETE . NE 0C R N N AR N NH | N | Y | Y | N| Y| Y | Y Nl REP N N AD ARYY Y . NM OC N N N N NV N N ~ AD AR ~ NY OC REP N N AR ADYY Y ST REP ONPOTTION OH REP N N AR N OK N N AR N N N OR AR AD ENV Y SOME PA Y COMB Y ALT BID RARELY N RATED Y Y Y IN BSI Rl OC N AR N N SC REP N N N N Y SD ALL AR N N Recyclable N Y N Y N Y CONT OPT N N N y N y N y N y y Y Y 56

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Policy (Section V, Question 1~21 Policy Replace vs Paint Zone & Spot Pt Need Prioritization | Waste Reduction | Solid | Hazardous TN Y COM N N TX UT REP N N AR AD Y Y Y I I I | | LOSS I I I VA N Y Y AR AD Y Y Y LEOCSSION V,E | COh ~| N | Y | N | N | Y | Y N COST WA N N AR AD WV N N AR AD WY OC N N N N N N ALB COMB AR AD N N BC REP N AR AD PEI QUE YT NB REP N Y AR AD Y N N ONT N AR NF ALL N N N LEAD ST ERDPLAC NS ~ SAS DEPEND N N AR AD N N MB NT Recyclable N y y y N N N N y _ N N N * VALUES ADJUSTED TO FIT SCALE 57

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, cont~nued Synthesis 257 survey responses Maintenance Numbas (Section V, Ouestion 22-31) | Numba Steel | Number Lead | Bridge Budget | Painting | Estimat' iNeeds | Reconis | Adequate | Pn~dictive | Aspects ~ 1 1const IMaint I 1 1 I T I AKI 430 1 375 1 20M 1 .8M 1 50K I 50K I AS I Y T Y I N AL| 1327 | _ | 36M | 13.5 | 3M | UNK | AGBMS | Y | N | Y AZT | UNK | 30M 1 IM l l I T I AR 2140 1700 UP TO DIST 34 M PROJ CAl l l l l l I I _ CTT 2500 | 2000 1 6M 1 .9 M 7 .9M | 1 1 PONT 1 N 1 N co 1- I I I T I I I I I _ DE | 202 | 113 | 13M | NONE | 3M | OPTRHOER | | N I _ FL | _ | 85% l l | | PRO| N| N| Y 8M 8MAS PROY N N GA I 1800 | 1200 1 45M 1 20M T | 1 PONT 1 1 1 _ | 2 | 2 | 1.5M 250K l 100/c | 50K | PONTIS | NOT CEP IL 1 3679 7 2730 7 319M ~63M 1 2M 7 20M Ft IR IOYR | PONT 1 1 CAPPS 1 N IN | 2423 | 400 r 3.5M NONE l 0 | 520K | PROJ | OK | | N IA | 1331 | 28 T 32M ~1 | | PROJPONT | DEV | N | N KS | 965 | 505 T 10M ~| SM | PROJ | | N | N KY | 3000 | 2700 T VAR VAP' | UNK | UNK | N | N | N | N LA | 625 T 4oo T 100M | SM T 50M T N T I I MA MD 1300 1000 40M 11M 500K Z 8M PONTIS N Need N N 58

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuec! Synthesis 257 su~vey responses Maintenance Numbers (Section V, Question 22-31) | Number Steel | Number Lead | Bridge Budget | Painting | Estimate ~Needs | Reoonis | Adequate ~ Predictive~ Aspects I l | Const | Maint l l l l | 5M REP l l l l l ME ~1000 | ALL ~23M ~10M | S% | ~BRIDGET ~UND DEV | Y | N M1 | 3200 | 1700 | 80M | 6M | DIFFERENT | 100M | AGENCY | NEEDIMP | N | Y MN | 14g2 | 693 | VAR | 3M | NONE | _ | PONTIS | NOT DEFI IED | N | N MO ~4050 ~3334 ~70M 74M ~23200( T ~OTHER ~I MT ~S00 ~400 ~12-lSM ~NO SEP ~NONE ~PONTIS ~N ~N NC ~7987 ~6940 ~110M ~40M ~30M | AGENCY | Y | N ~ONNRLUYsT ND | 2X0 | 2S0 | SM | SM | 2M | | PRO | Y | N I Y NE ~ 878 ~ UNK ~ SSM ~ UNK ~ UNK ~ UNK ~ PROJ ~ N ~ N ~ N NH ~ 1200 ~ 7S% ~ SM ~10% ~PONTIS ~PONTIS=I XP ~N | N NJ ~ 3000 ~ 1200 ~142M ~I SM ~2SM ~AGENCY ~? ~Y ~N NM | 900 I 9S I 1 5M I l l l l l l NV 207 106 VAR VAR VAR NO ES PROJ N N Y NY 13521 4156 300M 20M ST FOR OTHER BMS GEN EXCEPT N PROPOSE l l l 60 MCONT l l | PROP | FOR EXIS nNG | | D OH 5571 2530 l59M 19 4M l5M BMS PROJ N OK 2237 1987 45M 1 7M 1 SM 48M PROJ PRIORTIZE BUT N N PONTIS NO OPT E l l l l | | DBASE l l l OR | 450 | 300 | 40M 10M | 3M | 68M | PONT | | Y | Y PA 8272 3600 300M 1 SM UNK UNK AGENCY FOR OLD STR N N l l l l | | PRO | DIFF TO ~RJFY Rl 1 438 1 95% 1 79M 1 1 1 PONTIS Need 59

NC~ ~b Doc~e~ 1 1, co~i~cd Sy^sL 257 s~ey re~onses _~ I1 ~ ~ st ~1 Num~ ~1 1 ~nd~ | ~0m^ ~ 1 ~^ I I I . ~1 ~n1 i sc 1 ~ ~ ~ I I I ~ 1s ~1 1w 1 ~1 1~I ~1 ~I 1 ~1 - 1 ~5 ~1 ~] 1H ~P ~N N 4 ~256 ~Y Y Y ~ 1^ I ~I ~I 1 1 1 1 1 1 I _ 1 ~I I~osl I ~I ~I~ I I~ I I I _ 1 ~I I I I I I I I I 1 w^ I2iu I I] ~I]- Io I ~I~ I 1 I~ ~ 1 ~1] ~I ~I7- ., Io- I ~1~ 1 1Y 1N _ ~I ~l~s I ~1 ~1 1 1=C 1 I 1 ~ n Im I ~I I 6 I-~ I- I~ 1- T ~I~ _ nc 10 1~o 1 11- 1~ 1~-1 ~I 1' - 1 1 I I 1 1 I I I I I 1 I T 1 1 I 1 ~1 I ~Ilio I ~I- I~ I ~I I- I @50 1 ~1 - ~1 ~1~R 1 SH~ DBE 1 B~S 1 ~1 ~1 N ~-~30B~ 1 1 1 lC~'' I 1 1 1 1 - ~I'0 Io I ~I~ I I ~I' I" I" SAS 4] 27 1~5 ~5H B~S Y 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 I _ I 1 I I I 1 I 1 1 _ 60

NCHRP Web Document 11, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses CBM INTEGRATION WITH OTHER MAINTENANCE (Section V, Question 5) Alabama Alaska most of the maintenance is conditional mains. Arizona use sp. br. preservation fund for emery. Repairs Arkansas Emerg. takes precedence, other work delayed Califomia Maint of ex. pL condi is combined into overall br. main incl.majority concrete bridges Str. Maint coord. make dec. Colorado Connecticut Usu. limited to sit. at hand and not comb. If uexp. dam is major other mains. act may be included. Delaware Takes priority Florida usually include painting with repair/construction contract Georgia | in house bms runs br mains ant Not inmate v ith other mains. ant Hawaii no comment Idaho Illinois I items ass. vim CBM Combined at same time or Jeferred unless critical l Indiana Iowa Emerg. work not usu. integrated with other activities Kansas | _ l Kentucky | when oond. reach a remain point Here are Ram Its for repair l Louisiana | ax l Maine | performed as needed on priorly, immed resp is In option l Maryland br. repair/maint. are accel. or defer. To coincide with other work Massachusetts minor dam. cood with other act Major fixed immed. Michigan If br. hit, repair with ins. money hopefully.Other mains. item that are critical may be done providing funds avail. Minnesota Sched. with other contract or mains. act when possible Missouri Br. insp annuity suggests need for painting Pn~ns eked to see if mad. mains or replace. programed. If not, rep on priority basis 61

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses CBM INTEGRATION WITH OTHER MAIN ENANCE (Section V, Question 5) Montana no apparent tie Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire Insp. reports, sufficiency rating, logistics and cost New Jersey Br. painting maybe either Fed or State New Mexico Main. act are planned for br. Elements which req. action New York Br. element oond. is to prioritize and group work.Demand main. related to pub. safety is top priority. but cyclical and preventative corrective work is highest planned work North Carolina | given top priority North Dakota not integrated Ohio | _ Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania called demand mains. takes priority. done immed. or br is restricted Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota work performed immed. if qtr. perf is affected. otherwise deferred Ill othe mains. is sch. Tennessee as needed usu. with sp. Iettings with short oompl etion time depending on severity of damage. Other less critical work comb. with correction of other deficiencies into a contract mains. project Texas Utah integrated by rehab squad of strs. Div along with qtr. mains coord. Vrrtnont | _ l ... Virglola Washington Washington, DC West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming usu. not integrated Alberta Depends on urgency. safety iss. Fixed asap. May be sp to extent that notElt into normal processes 62

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses CBM INTEGRATION WITH OTHER MAINTENANCE (Section V, Question 5) Brush Columbia | when poss deferred to better voucher. lfs~r. in eggs involoved done as soon as possible Prince Edward Island l Ouebec Yukon Terntones New Brunswick funds are diverted from routine mains to do CBM Ontario Usu. attempt to include with other work for economy of scale unless emergency sit. Newfoundland where possible Nova Sootia Saskatchewan done by same team Manitoba Northwest Territories 63

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses | PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE VS OTHER MAINTENANCE Section V, Ouestion 6) Alabama | Low priority due ho limited funds and needs in condition base Alaska | There is more planning is secwing funding and would be a systematic repair Arizona | work is schduled and programmed Arlcansas no obvious immed. need for this work California Major toll rds constantly maintained by state crews. Sm qtr. contractor out. Colorado Connecticut pm Ben done on groups of bridges that are similar in age and location. Other main.perfommded in response to deficiencies Delaware n/a Florida Georgia Hawaii | no commons Idaho Illinois not being used. Indiana none Iowa bridge worlc replacement, bridge app. upgrade, NOT Kansas pm done by state forces. major maintenance done by contractors Kentucky Do painting only as preventative maintennce and clean br. drains as needed Louisiana Maine Activities applied regardless of condition Maryland pm is painting and replacement of joints. PM act have low priority due to limited resow ces Massachusetts | - ~ Michigan | Spot painting of newly p unfed bndges(2-5) yt us to extend service life Minnesota | Work is done to minimize but rep;urs or to exh Id life of structure 64

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE VS. OTHER MAINTENANCE Section V, Question 6) Missouri Have sp. crews that work statewide painting bridges Montana | n/a Nebraska Thru BMS recommendations are made for overlays, painting or repairs, done to prolong life of structure Nevada pm is mainly cleaning duties and minor erosion channel air New Jersey n/a New York pm mnsists of cyclical act, cleaning, painting, lute bearings, sealling PCC decks, filling cracks. Includes work on non deficient bridges(rated 5 or higher) to keep non deficient New Hampshire washing of deicing salts and antispalling cmpd and sealing of cracks. New Mexico some pm will be used after implementation of PONllS North Carolina | North Dakota n/a Ohio Those activities that preserve before deteroriation sets in, includes concrete sealers,painting, deck washing, epoxy resteel Oklahoma replanning deck joints along with paint projects Oregon try to perform those activities which will anticipate and head off future problems Pennsylvania pm done to preclude degradation and to keep bridge as close to original coed. as pass. as opposed to repairing damage Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Perf by state forces. Periodic such as cleaning joints, sweeping decks, sealing cracks, cleaning substr. and washing girders Tennessee accompl. with state forces. all other mains is by contract Texas Utah Vermont Do not distinguish bet all mains is preventative or damage repair Virginia Washington Washington, DC . West Virginia as funds become available Wisconsin Wyoming Alberta Focused on strs. that are good as well as bad 65

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses PREVENTIVE MAINTENANCE VS. OTHER MAINTENANCE Section V, Question 6) British Columbia could be called routine mains done by main. contractors Prince Edward Island Quebec Yukon Tenritones l New Brunswick | washing of bridges and goosing of bearings Ontario prey. main done on routine basis. regardless of condit Ben. main done as needed Nr wfoundland | _ Nova Scotia Saskatchewan example is electro chemical chloride removal from reinforced column Manitoba Northwest Territories 66

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses | REHABILITATION VS. F~EPLACEMENf I action V, Question 7) Alabama Remaining est. ser. Fife and life cycle cost Alaska remaining life, funding sources, cost comparison Arizona | If rehab = 6o3/o oPre~olacernent~ repl strongly or iidered Arkansas Amount of Federal participation California Cost, load capacity of st. qtr. and current standard req. Colorado Economics Connecticut Sufficiency ratings based on qtr. deficiency and functinal obsolescence det rehab or repl. Historical signif.entff also Delaware Cond. of all components, traffic vol and historical signif Florida | Georgia Cost and traffic control Hawaii | serviceability of structure Idaho Illinois If cost of rehab. exceed or nearly exceed cost of never qtr. Indiana Condition of str Io`Ya Type of bridge, ref. cost, 30% of repl, do rehab. level of service of highway Kansas Degree of deterioration and serice life Kentucky | Posting, goern. br. width, cost is also a factor Louisiana Other bridge factors such as loading, deck coed. width Maine T cost trantlc need Maryland | Usu.o~stoondition and str.capacity Massachusetts Michigan Cost. Br. Design Div does cost comparisons Minnesota Cost is primary factor, incl. approach work Missouri Deck and several ratings and funding 67

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses REHABILITATION VS. REPLACEMENT (Section V, Question 7) Montana cost Nebraska If substr. in good shape, then br. cold be rehab. Nevada Soundness of elements which may be left in place and cost to bring up to current standards versus repl. Historical value is a consideration New Jersey repl. considered for var. reas., bunch obsolete, qtr. deficient New York Cost, coed. of var. elements, capacity, alignment New Hampshire Functinally obsolete structural type, long term mains costs and cost New Mexico Cost rehab. vs repl, cond of substr.and life exp. of alternative North Carolina Cost versus increased service life North Dakota Amt. of paint failure and condition of bridge Ohio If rehab cost exceed 50°/O of replacemnt Oklahoma Substr. coed, superstr. coed, width of qtr. Cost effective compared to repl Oregon | Costis biggest factor Historir~signif entersil dso Pennsylvania Cost If rehab> 70% of repl, look at it. Other factors incl lead paint removal, service life, lenght, location/site restraints Rhode Island South Dakota Safety coed. servicability, economics, funding available South Carolina Tennessee Cost effectiveness Texas Utah Gen. coed, cost of rehab vs repl., traffic loads and geometry of of the structure Vermont T % delaminaltion or severe surfsealing % of ar of artiveconosion rend of deck solicit ... Vlrgmla Washington | Cost and functionaliyt of the bridge Washington, DC West Virginia Degradation of steel, funding for repl Wisconsin Wyoming Sufficiency rating, load capacity Alberta Life cycle cost analysis British Columbia Cost 68

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses | REHABILITATION VS.REPLACEMENT ~ ;ection V,Ouestion7) j Prince Edward Island l l Quebec Yukon Territories New Brunswick Cost, funds available, traffic,loads alignment, age and capacity Ontario Prepare life cycle to present value, Financial analysis for competitive options Newfoundland Rehab. 50% of repl Nova Scotia l l Saskatchewan Level of service. public safety cost Manitoba Northwest Territories 69

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Defer Defena1 criteria Alabama Alaska no policy but needs beyond funds are deferred Arizona But if work can be more cheaply by combining with other act. it is considered Arkansas When major work is ached. in near future California But main. eng. will determine overall needs and may defer Colorado need Connecticut N not a policy but will defer when larger scale main is anticipated in area. Impact of defer is considered. Delaware but only if repVrehab is upcoming Florida Georgia Hawaii n Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa n Kansas Kentucky Not a fommal policy funding based Louisiana Y money Maine Life cycle costs Maryland Limited funds and manpower cone. on those activities that impove qtr. cap and maintain current accept level Massachusetts x Michigan Only for large projects, then minimal money spent til funded Minnesota no written policy, but traffic consid and limited funds make this practice essential Missouri If rehab or repl is ached. for near future 70

NCHRP Web Document 1 I, continues! Synthesis 257 survey responses Defff Deferral criteria Montana Y If bridge is in program or planned to be replaced :~ ~ Nevada If rehab or repl is ached. for near future New Jersey Cost and if future rehab/repl planned New York N May deferred because of priorites, lack of funds, but sch work but no formal policy New Hampshire Y Depends if on 10 yr plan and where New Mexico N North Carolina North Dakota Amount of funding available Ohio If other work is scheduled, such as 4 laning will delay br work until then. Oklahoma Defer paint if sch for repl within 10 years Oregon Cost Pennsylvania Y age condition, nut. repl/rehab. Many deferre til funding becomes avail. Rhode Island Soup Dakota Y If sch. for repl, minimal mains performed to provide for public safety. South Carolina Manpower and funding Tennessee Age, cond and costs balanced against when funding available for repVrehab Texas Utah Y to the planning of other projects in the area Vermont x Virginia ~ . Washington Y Washington, DC West Virginia Y Funding Wisconsin Wyoming If br is be rehab/repl in 5 years, main. is deferred Alberta Disruption to public, safety considerations, mobilization.inc. costs from deferral 71

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Defer Deferral criteria British Columbia Y Avail of funds or other act. that would preclude, destroy or compromise coating system. Prince Edward Island Quebec Yukon Territories New Brunswick Y May be deferred to coincide with other maintenance activities. Ontario Y Avail. of fund, other work in area importanc of str, traffic vol and detours avail. Newfoundland Y funding Nova Scotia Saskatchewan Y Structure age, cost benefit risk to public Manitoba Northwest Territories 72

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses MAJOR VS. REHAB VS. REPLACEMENT Alabama High cost, ser factors enter the decision Alaska use of specialized br. repair News and materials. rehab and repl would be by contract Arizona Marjor mains is when repla is not an option. Arkansas Costly act. Maj main only restores, not improves. California Maj done by contract. Rehab is to improve exist. coed. std and capacity Repl is to repl exist. str which is below coed. rating Colorado Connecticut Maj = work unable to completed by st. forges alone. Once identifiedd, scope is determined by const and design forces Delaware Florida Georgia | maj = modularjt repl.,deck repl. Tic Rehab me ns bring whole structure up to standards Hawaii Idaho Illinois < $25000 done in house. Contrac main < $150000. Rehab usu exceeds $150000. repl is by contract Indiana activity state forces cannot do Iowa n/a Kansas Maj = Maint done by contract . Rehab and repl = difffunding category Kentucky Maj mains does not result in upgrading structure Louisiana Maine Maint. Repairs a sp. deficiency. Rehab will restore to acceptable standard which may be an improvement over origial design Maryland Maj= act perfommed to preserve existing qtr. Rehab = deck and parapet repl. widenings, substr or superstr repl. Replacement= all existing components Massachusetts Michigan Spot paint and topcoat entir qtr. On small qtr. br. mains Rev might clean and paint entire bridge Minnesota Maj = utilization of larger than nommal portion of labor resoruce does not directly relate to extent of work on a particular str Missouri Painting entire supastr. without any rehab would be mad. maintenance because of removal of exist. paint Montana Maj work that state forges can't do Nebraska 73

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses MAJOR VS. REHAB VS. REPLACEMENT Nevada Maj = no altering of orig. design and contracting of work(>$50,000) New Jersey Maj = replacement in kind while rehab. Ben is an improvement New York | extent, nature and mst det categ. Maint only pi belly adders of elements whereas rehab/repl address all some overlap New Hampshire Maj = widening, new deck: rehab = new curb and rail, jt repl. Repl. = new qtr. New Mexico an act that can't done solely by st. forces, usu only certain elements worked. under rehab all deficincies are corrected. North Carolina repl or repair is a major qtr. component : ~do not do mad. Maint. rehab would be blast clean and repaint Ohio Major = deck overlay with a specialty concrete. Deck repl and/or widening = rehab. Oklahoma Typically substructure repair Oregon Pennsylvania Maj main.= work too intensive for st. forces, but is still considered a mains. act Rhode Island South Dakota work done by st. forces mad work needed due to accident or natural disaster, regionide scope of work sched. for qualifying strs. South Carolina Maj = activity which cannot be performed by st. forces but nec to maintain str safety and capability Tennessee Maj= work approaching 50 60% of repl without widening to meet current stds. Rehab= repairs and rennovation including increased width to bring qtr. to NBIS 80 sufficiency rating. Texas Utah scope of work and cost Vermont | do not d6tinqursh Virginia Washington Act. over $15000. Rehab and repl done by contract Washington, DC West Virginia Mar= cleaning and painting minor repair. Rehab = replacing one or more members and making qtr. stronger Wisconsin Wyoming Rel. cost: rehab is never coside to incl repl, only work done to existing qtr. Alberta ~ $50000 cost incl rehab or repl as option British Columbia rel cost is sole diffbet major and minor rehab involves qtr. modification. Repl is where cost and othe cosideration make new enhanced qtr. more efficient Prince Edward Island Quebec | 74

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continuer! Synthesis 257 survey responses MAJOR VS. REHAB VS. REPLACEMENT Yukon Territories l Ne~vBrunr,~vick | Maj =such things as replacing mainstr. memo r, jackingto rapt bearings. nailing is detened and minimal work done | Ontario | Maj work done under a capital program oontnu Routine main covered under main. funding which is very variable in commitment l Newfoundland Nova Scotia Saskatchewan | Maj mains only addresses one bridge deficient rrhab/repl addresses more than one defiencey l Manitoba Northwest Territories 75

NCHRP Web Document ~ I, continued Synthesis 257 survey responses Research responses Limited evaluation of compositional formulations and proprietary coatings Field evaluation of metallizing and organic zinc; informal evaluation of zinc rich and overcoat materials California Connecticut Delaware Georgia Illinois Evaluation of MCU and proprietary grease for bearings: determined Calcium Sulfonate system too soft Adhesion tests on inorganic zinc Comparing Calcium Sulfonate, MCU, PU, MIO, Epoxy sealers, Epoxy Mastics and acrylic water borne topcoats to standard SSPC alkyd Extensive 6 year evaluation of overcoating Informal evaluation of overcoating Experimental project evaluation of Calcium Sulfonate and epoxy Mastic Participated in Ocean City/FHWA research project on overcoating and has a 3 year overcoating evaluation underway Numerous weathering steel reports included 35 systems applied to Mathis Bridge VOC compliant systems evaluated at Manteo and Overcoat at Manns Harbor, See report in Journal of Protective Coatings and Linings, May, 1995, pp. 23-29 Evaluating MIO MCU and overcoating Included ratings on accelerated performance study of 5 proprietary systems and field evaluation of 7 overcoating systems. Conclusions not reported Continuous ongoing performance panel testing of various materials Research analysis of plastic flame coat and metallizing underway Evaluating use of clear epoxy sealers for use on weathering steel to seal out moisture l Evaluation of multiple overcoat systems on poorly adhered existing paint Coating project to isolate galv. baseplates from caustic grouts Coatings are field tested prior to inclusion on approved list L ab evaluation of overcoat materials with test patches on bridges Kentucky Maryland Missouri New Hampshire Michigan New Jersey Norm Carolina North Dakota Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Washington Virginia Alberta British Columbia Ontario 76

Maintenance Issues and Alternate Corrosion Protection Methods for Exposed Bridge Steel - Appendix C: Survey Responses Get This Book
×
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
  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!