Performance-Based Pavement Warranty Practices (2020) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Pages 87-94
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 87... ...
A P P E N D I X B Agency Survey Responses B-1 Canadian Agencies Alberta Transportation Manitoba Infrastructure New Brunswick Transportation and Infrastructure Newfoundland and Labrador DOT and Works Ontario Ministry of Transportation Quebec Ministry of Transport U.S. Agencies Alabama DOT Alaska DOT and Public Facilities Arizona DOT Arkansas DOT California DOT Colorado DOT Connecticut DOT Delaware DOT Florida DOT Hawaii DOT Idaho Transportation Department Illinois DOT Indiana DOT Iowa DOT Kansas DOT Kentucky Transportation Cabinet Louisiana DOT and Development Maine DOT Maryland DOT Michigan DOT Minnesota DOT Mississippi DOT Missouri DOT Montana DOT Nebraska DOT Nevada DOT New Jersey DOT New Mexico DOT New York State DOT North Dakota DOT Ohio DOT Oklahoma DOT Pennsylvania DOT Puerto Rico Highway and Transportation Authority Rhode Island DOT South Carolina DOT South Dakota DOT Tennessee DOT Utah DOT Virginia DOT Washington State DOT West Virginia Division of Highways Wisconsin DOT Wyoming DOT 1.
|
From page 88... ...
B-2 Performance-Based Pavement Warranty Practices Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wyoming No. responding agencies: 50 2.
|
From page 89... ...
Agency Survey Responses B-3 Impacts to contractor bonding capacity 9 Response Agencies No. of Agencies Pilot or demo project only California, Illinois, Kentucky, Missouri, Tennessee, and Washington State 6 Large number of disputes California, Mississippi, South Carolina, South Dakota, and Wisconsin 5 Did not achieve expected performance Colorado, Maryland, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Wisconsin 5 Insufficient competition Alaska, Arizona, Hawaii, Maryland, and Newfoundland and Labrador 5 Determined to be too high risk Connecticut, Iowa, and Montana 3 Costly claims Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Wisconsin 3 No.
|
From page 90... ...
B-4 Performance-Based Pavement Warranty Practices 6. Are pavement warranties currently mandated?
|
From page 91... ...
Agency Survey Responses B-5 Warranties are not included with bid package; however, warranties are used occasionally as part of a Settlement Agreement to accept a non-compliant pavement, in addition to or in lieu of certain contract requirements conditions. Currently developing pavement warranty specifications and have not yet developed criteria.
|
From page 92... ...
B-6 Performance-Based Pavement Warranty Practices Mix Design Alberta, California, Florida, Maine, Michigan, New Brunswick, New York, Ohio, Ontario, Pennsylvania, Utah, and West Virginia 12 Pavement Thickness Design Alberta, Florida, Idaho, Ontario, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia 6 Pavement Type (Treatment) Selection Alberta, Ontario, Pennsylvania, and West Virginia 4 No.
|
From page 93... ...
Agency Survey Responses B-7 Agency time savings Alberta, Idaho, North Dakota, Ontario, and Pennsylvania 5 Agency cost savings Idaho, North Dakota, Virginia, and West Virginia 4 Improved use of materials California and New York 2 No. responding agencies: 14 Other comments: Performance improvement and failure reduction have yet to be determined.
|
From page 94... ...
B-8 Performance-Based Pavement Warranty Practices 16. The synthesis will include case examples illustrating agency pavement warranty practices.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.