Midwest States Pooled Fund Pavement Preservation Partnership

Print
General Information
Solicitation Number: 880
Status: End Solicitation Phase
Date Posted: Jun 01, 2004
Last Updated: May 18, 2005
Solicitation Expires: Jun 01, 2005
Partners: Manitoba Transportation, IADOT, IL, IN, KS, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, OH, WI
Lead Organization: Michigan Department of Transportation
Financial Summary
Commitment Start Year: 2005
Commitment End Year: 2008
100% SP&R Approval: Approved
Commitments Required: $195,000.00
Commitments Received: $220,000.00
Contact Information
Lead Study Contact(s): Kevin Kennedy
kennedyk@michigan.gov
FHWA Technical Liaison(s): Keith Herbold
keith.herbold@fhwa.dot.gov
Phone: 708-283-3548
Organization Year Commitments Technical Contact Name Funding Contact Name Contact Number Email Address
Illinois Department of Transportation 2004 $5,000.00 David Lippert 217-782-7200 David.Lippert@illinois.gov
Illinois Department of Transportation 2005 $10,000.00 David Lippert 217-782-7200 David.Lippert@illinois.gov
Indiana Department of Transportation 2004 $45,000.00 Tommy Nantung Tommy Nantung 765-463-1521 ext 248 tnantung@indot.in.gov
Iowa Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Francis Todey Carol Culver 515-239-1208 carol.culver@iowadot.us
Iowa Department of Transportation 2007 $10,000.00 Francis Todey Carol Culver 515-239-1208 carol.culver@iowadot.us
Kansas Department of Transportation 2005 $15,000.00 Roy Rissky Rodney Montney 785-291-3844 rodney@ksdot.org
Manitoba Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Manitoba Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Manitoba Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Michigan Department of Transportation 2005 $25,000.00 Laura Nelhiebel 517-335-0719 nelhiebell@michigan.gov
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2004 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Missouri Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Missouri Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Missouri Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
North Dakota Department of Transportation 2004 $15,000.00 Jerry Horner Ron Horner 701-328-6904 rhorner@nd.gov
Ohio Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Ohio Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Ohio Department of Transportation 2008 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov

Background

Public infrastructure, such as highways, streets, and bridges has not been traditionally regarded as assets in a formal accounting sense. The public operators of these facilities have been more concerned with physical conditions and capabilities than with book cost and replacement value and they reported their financial information using fund and modified accrual accounting methods. But in future, these operators will be required to treat such capital infrastructure as assets, the value of which they must periodically report using full accrual accounting methods as is presently required for vehicles and equipment.

To guide and assist state and local government agencies in preparing the required reports, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has developed a detailed specification known as Statement 34 (GASB 34). This specification allows agencies to use either traditional depreciation accounting or a potentially more attractive modified approach which presumes that roadway assets will be preserved at predetermined acceptable condition levels.

Preserving roadways at predetermined condition levels will require the careful use of established pavement preservation techniques. Materials, methods and specifications for new construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of roads have been highly developed by years of peer-reviewed research and discussion by the Transportation Research Board (TRB), the American Society for the Testing of Materials (ASTM), and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Unfortunately, the same is not true for pavement preservation techniques, which seriously lag behind the demand for such knowledge. The use of pavement preservation techniques varies throughout the United States. In some cases, techniques that were applied for years are no longer used because of poor performance caused by inadequate design, materials, specifications, construction, performance criteria, or quality control and quality assurance.

Developing national protocols for pavement preservation and publishing them as AASHTO standards would improve overall quality and treatment performance. But developing such standards will take time. Meanwhile many state, county and local highway agencies are building experience and developing knowledge in design, materials, specifications, and performance criteria in the area of preservation. Exchanging this information is invaluable to highway agencies.

Objectives

The project objectives are:

- Provide funds for a multi-day annual workshop for discussion and exchange of information and knowledge about each state's pavement preservation program.

- Provide a means to define, support and share technology of mutual interest.

- Establish and maintain MPPP's web site that would display meeting reports, state guidelines, specifications, and allow users to post help questions.

- Provide funds for formal training presentations during the annual workshop.

- Provide funds for management support of MPPP through the National Center for Pavement Preservation at Michigan State University.

The following benefits are expected to be derived from this project:

1. More timely solutions for common issues from shared experiences, technology transfer, and research initiatives resulting from collaboration.

2. Minimal effort duplication and wasted resources resulting from an ability to focus on common objectives.

3. Increased learning from group training fith Timely discussion and consensus on the value of the material presented.

4. Identification of common research needs, funding mechanisms, and priorities for the work studies.

5. Reduction of the states¿ program costs as a result of adopting common procedures, materials, and treatment specifications.

Scope of Work

There is a need to assist states in developing sound pavement investment programs to gain infrastructure and operational efficiencies and also satisfy the new reporting requirements of GASB 34.

While some of the MPPP states have developed preventive maintenance programs as a key step in preserving their pavement investment and extending their serviceability with cost effective preservation treatments, other states could benefit from a sharing of the knowledge gained from this experience. Such a partnership would develop sound preservation practices by a beneficial sharing of information on treatment designs, construction practices, performance measures, and research needs. Specific funding is needed to:

1. Assure participation and collaboration among the states at an annual workshop meeting;

2. Implement task operations, as designated by MPPP¿s Steering Committee; and,

3. Managing the MPPP¿s operations to include an annual meeting, reporting, and developing and maintaining an informational web-site.

Comments

This will be a three year project with likely renewal. Additional meetings, besides the annual workshop and task groups, are possible. The proposed budget will cover the cost of meeting arrangements, state travel, and a meeting report. Each state will provide funding of $15,000 for a three year level of effort. The three year commitment/obligation of funds can be split over the three years or the full amount can be committed/obligated in the first year of the program. Thirteen states have expressed interest in the program (IL, IN, IA, KS, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, ND, OH, SD, WI).

Proceedings from the annual workshop and task group meetings will be documented by a report. An annual report of MPPP¿s affairs and events will be prepared by the National Center for Pavement Preservation (NCPP). NCPP will provide oversight and a web-site for MPPP as determined by MPPP¿s Steering Committee and its by-laws.

Documents Attached
Title File/Link Type Privacy Download
Midwest States Pooled Fund Pavement Preservation Partnership 880.pdf Solicitation Public

Midwest States Pooled Fund Pavement Preservation Partnership

General Information
Solicitation Number: 880
Status: End Solicitation Phase
Date Posted: Jun 01, 2004
Last Updated: May 18, 2005
Solicitation Expires: Jun 01, 2005
Partners: Manitoba Transportation, IADOT, IL, IN, KS, MI, MN, MO, MT, ND, OH, WI
Lead Organization: Michigan Department of Transportation
Financial Summary
Commitment Start Year: 2005
Commitment End Year: 2008
100% SP&R Approval: Approved
Commitments Required: $195,000.00
Commitments Received: $220,000.00
Contact Information
Lead Study Contact(s): Kevin Kennedy
kennedyk@michigan.gov
FHWA Technical Liaison(s): Keith Herbold
keith.herbold@fhwa.dot.gov
Phone: 708-283-3548
Commitments by Organizations
Agency Year Commitments Technical Contact Name Funding Contact Name Contact Number Email Address
Illinois Department of Transportation 2004 $5,000.00 David Lippert 217-782-7200 David.Lippert@illinois.gov
Illinois Department of Transportation 2005 $10,000.00 David Lippert 217-782-7200 David.Lippert@illinois.gov
Indiana Department of Transportation 2004 $45,000.00 Tommy Nantung Tommy Nantung 765-463-1521 ext 248 tnantung@indot.in.gov
Iowa Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Francis Todey Carol Culver 515-239-1208 carol.culver@iowadot.us
Iowa Department of Transportation 2007 $10,000.00 Francis Todey Carol Culver 515-239-1208 carol.culver@iowadot.us
Kansas Department of Transportation 2005 $15,000.00 Roy Rissky Rodney Montney 785-291-3844 rodney@ksdot.org
Manitoba Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Manitoba Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Manitoba Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Dennis Watson Ray Van Cauwenberghe 204-945-1934 RVanCauwen@gov.mb.ca
Michigan Department of Transportation 2005 $25,000.00 Laura Nelhiebel 517-335-0719 nelhiebell@michigan.gov
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2004 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Minnesota Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Jerry Geib Lisa Jansen 651-366-3779 lisa.jansen@state.mn.us
Missouri Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Missouri Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Missouri Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 James Carney Mara Campbell 573-526-6687 mara.campbell@modot.mo.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
Montana Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Jon Watson Susan Sillick 406-444-7693 ssillick@mt.gov
North Dakota Department of Transportation 2004 $15,000.00 Jerry Horner Ron Horner 701-328-6904 rhorner@nd.gov
Ohio Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Ohio Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Ohio Department of Transportation 2008 $5,000.00 Dave Humphrey General Research 614-644-8135 Research@dot.state.oh.us
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2005 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2006 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov
Wisconsin Department of Transportation 2007 $5,000.00 Lori Richter 608-264-8435 lori.richter@dot.wi.gov

Background

Public infrastructure, such as highways, streets, and bridges has not been traditionally regarded as assets in a formal accounting sense. The public operators of these facilities have been more concerned with physical conditions and capabilities than with book cost and replacement value and they reported their financial information using fund and modified accrual accounting methods. But in future, these operators will be required to treat such capital infrastructure as assets, the value of which they must periodically report using full accrual accounting methods as is presently required for vehicles and equipment.

To guide and assist state and local government agencies in preparing the required reports, the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) has developed a detailed specification known as Statement 34 (GASB 34). This specification allows agencies to use either traditional depreciation accounting or a potentially more attractive modified approach which presumes that roadway assets will be preserved at predetermined acceptable condition levels.

Preserving roadways at predetermined condition levels will require the careful use of established pavement preservation techniques. Materials, methods and specifications for new construction, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of roads have been highly developed by years of peer-reviewed research and discussion by the Transportation Research Board (TRB), the American Society for the Testing of Materials (ASTM), and the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO). Unfortunately, the same is not true for pavement preservation techniques, which seriously lag behind the demand for such knowledge. The use of pavement preservation techniques varies throughout the United States. In some cases, techniques that were applied for years are no longer used because of poor performance caused by inadequate design, materials, specifications, construction, performance criteria, or quality control and quality assurance.

Developing national protocols for pavement preservation and publishing them as AASHTO standards would improve overall quality and treatment performance. But developing such standards will take time. Meanwhile many state, county and local highway agencies are building experience and developing knowledge in design, materials, specifications, and performance criteria in the area of preservation. Exchanging this information is invaluable to highway agencies.

Objectives

The project objectives are:

- Provide funds for a multi-day annual workshop for discussion and exchange of information and knowledge about each state's pavement preservation program.

- Provide a means to define, support and share technology of mutual interest.

- Establish and maintain MPPP's web site that would display meeting reports, state guidelines, specifications, and allow users to post help questions.

- Provide funds for formal training presentations during the annual workshop.

- Provide funds for management support of MPPP through the National Center for Pavement Preservation at Michigan State University.

The following benefits are expected to be derived from this project:

1. More timely solutions for common issues from shared experiences, technology transfer, and research initiatives resulting from collaboration.

2. Minimal effort duplication and wasted resources resulting from an ability to focus on common objectives.

3. Increased learning from group training fith Timely discussion and consensus on the value of the material presented.

4. Identification of common research needs, funding mechanisms, and priorities for the work studies.

5. Reduction of the states¿ program costs as a result of adopting common procedures, materials, and treatment specifications.

Scope of Work

There is a need to assist states in developing sound pavement investment programs to gain infrastructure and operational efficiencies and also satisfy the new reporting requirements of GASB 34.

While some of the MPPP states have developed preventive maintenance programs as a key step in preserving their pavement investment and extending their serviceability with cost effective preservation treatments, other states could benefit from a sharing of the knowledge gained from this experience. Such a partnership would develop sound preservation practices by a beneficial sharing of information on treatment designs, construction practices, performance measures, and research needs. Specific funding is needed to:

1. Assure participation and collaboration among the states at an annual workshop meeting;

2. Implement task operations, as designated by MPPP¿s Steering Committee; and,

3. Managing the MPPP¿s operations to include an annual meeting, reporting, and developing and maintaining an informational web-site.

Comments

This will be a three year project with likely renewal. Additional meetings, besides the annual workshop and task groups, are possible. The proposed budget will cover the cost of meeting arrangements, state travel, and a meeting report. Each state will provide funding of $15,000 for a three year level of effort. The three year commitment/obligation of funds can be split over the three years or the full amount can be committed/obligated in the first year of the program. Thirteen states have expressed interest in the program (IL, IN, IA, KS, MI, MN, MO, MT, NE, ND, OH, SD, WI).

Proceedings from the annual workshop and task group meetings will be documented by a report. An annual report of MPPP¿s affairs and events will be prepared by the National Center for Pavement Preservation (NCPP). NCPP will provide oversight and a web-site for MPPP as determined by MPPP¿s Steering Committee and its by-laws.

Title Type Private
Midwest States Pooled Fund Pavement Preservation Partnership Solicitation N

Currently, Transportation Pooled Fund is not supported on mobile devices, please access this Web portal using a desktop or laptop computer.