Skip to contentUnited States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway AdministrationSearch FHWAFeedback

Infrastructure

 
FHWA > Infrastructure > Library > FHWA-RD-03-071 > Appendix B
<< Previous Contents Next >>

Infrastructure Research and Technology Stakeholder Workshop Summary Report: Workshop Proceedings

Appendix B - Infrastructure R&T Stakeholder Workshop PowerPoint Presentations

Slide 1

FHWA Infrastructure Research & Technology Program Asset Management Group

Dave Ekern, Chair
Tim Lomax, Co-Chair
Theresa Fountain, Facilitator
Heather Tracy, Notetaker

Slide 2

Vision

  • Why are we doing this?
  • Is it new?
  • Implement improved holistic asset management decision-making by developing the tools, data, training necessary to support implementation and improve customer service.
    • Move from FHWA Ownership to Partnership
    • Common goal: Greater reliance on stakeholder partners to accomplish the program.

Slide 3

Information

  • Integration of disparate databases
    • Safety, Condition, Traffic, etc.
  • Predictability Models
    • Condition, investment benefits, etc.
  • Estimate Highway User Cost & Society Costs

(These 3 ideas equally ranked)

Slide 4

People

  • Provide Material for "trainers", students and practitioners
    • LTAP
    • College/University Certificates
  • Asset Mgmt. Institute to bring disciplines together
    • location-based
    • internet-based classes & certificate
    • both w/in college curriculum and outside
  • Show how "silo" Mgmt. Systems relate to full Asset Mgmt Systems

Slide 5

Technology

  • Include tools to specifically link individual Mgmt. Systems to AM (include risk analysis)
  • Interface AM w/ operations, safety, congestion, human resources
  • AM is a process and analysis tools
    • need data integration process
    • institutional problems
    • complex & diverse issues in each state

Slide 6

Deployment

  • Need deployment within FHWA (links needed to HQ and field offices
  • Is Asset Mgmt the "program du jour"? How to give it "legs" INSTITUTIONALIZE!!!
    • Demonstrate effective decisions from AM
    • Show that results are used
    • Enact in law
    • Create a Funding category
  • Define perf. targets & not process
  • Need more than just tools
    • Message to convey
    • Training required
    • Marketing strategy needed

Slide 7

Resource Allocation Results

  • Technology 24%
  • Information 26%
  • Deployment 27%
  • People 23%
  • R&D 50%, Deploym't 50%

Slide 8

FHWA Infrastructure R&T Stakeholder Workshop

Structures Breakout Group

Slide 9

Structures Breakout

  • Global Issues
  • People
  • Deployment
  • Bridge of the Future
  • Stewardship
  • Safety, Reliability and Security

Slide 10

Global

  • FHWA must take a leadership role in collecting and disseminating research in progress and research results from all sources (FHWA, SP&R, NCHRP, International)
  • FHWA must keep its technical people current as technical experts and allowed to attend technical meetings (national and international presence)
  • Redo the format of the Structures white paper
  • Clarification of the time line for this proposal
  • Stakeholder involvement excellent, future involvement needed to refine & prioritize

Slide 11

People

  • FHWA must continue and emphasize its role in training
  • Assist states in providing models for managing R&D programs and sharing best practices

Slide 12

Deployment

  • Clarify that Delta-costs are included
  • Concerned with leaving incrementalism behind
  • Further stakeholder involvement in redefining IBRC is desired

Slide 13

Bridge of the Future

  • Objectives must be realistic
  • Reorganize by shorter and longer term objectives
  • Expand to include rehabilitation and methods
  • Emphasize minimize impact on traveling public

Slide 14

Stewardship

  • Group felt the proposal has merit
  • Real problem with format (long term bridge performance program)

Slide 15

Safety, Reliability and Security

  • Divide into natural and man-made (accidental & intentional)
  • Methodology for quantifying safety and reliability is essentially a FHWA role

Slide 16

FHWA Infrastructure R&T Stakeholder Workshop

Pavements Breakout Group

Slide 17

Framework

  • Specific Outcomes Should be Defined
  • Allocation of Effort Should
    • Vary by functional area
    • State ranges rather than numbers
    • Devote sufficient effort to research
    • Be better defined in terms of source
    • Not invite earmarking
  • Transition Timeframe Needed

Slide 18

Framework

  • Role of FHWA
    • High-risk research
    • Leadership & coordination
    • Capturing & disseminating innovation by all
    • Identifying and filling gaps address
  • Policy Barriers
    • Funding demo projects w/construction
    • Allow construction $ for innovation
    • Emphasize innovation throughout FHWA

Slide 19

Framework

  • Stakeholder Involvement Needs
    • Formal process
    • Program & project level input
    • Involvement of non-traditional stakeholders for fundamental research
  • Vision Should Include "Environmental-Friendly"

Slide 20

Needed Emphasis

  • Pavement System Design, Not Just Mix Design
  • Extend Use of Locally Available Materials
    • Less sensitive designs
    • Technology to allow use
  • Performance Prediction Models
    • Pavement management
    • Tie performance to materials

Slide 21

Needed Emphasis

  • Traffic Prediction (Loading)
  • LTPP
    • Assess process viability
    • Fill data gaps
    • Proactively analyze available results

Slide 22

Needed Emphasis

  • Training
    • Should address agency and contractor workforce as well as university
    • Pavement design training essential
    • Certification may be considered

Slide 23

Needed Emphasis

  • Pavement Management
    • Need broader concept than ROI
  • Maintenance & Rehabilitation
    • Should be included
    • Is important to full asset management

Slide 24

FHWA Infrastructure R&TStakeholder Workshop

Stakeholder Process Breakout Group

Slide 25

Stakeholder Introduction

  • Briefed by FHWA on current Stakeholder Process
  • Input from each Breakout Group
  • Addressed the FHWA "White Paper"
  • Identified recommendations for the Stakeholder Role on the FHWA Long-term R/T Program
  • FHWA should continue to conduct AND coordinate research
  • Security issues should be specifically included

Slide 26

Stakeholder Group

  • Endorse the "White Paper" with suggestions
    • Conduct and Coordinate
    • Discretionary Funds
    • Merit Reviews

Slide 27

Stakeholder Group

  • Three levels of Stakeholder Involvement
    • Strategic
    • Programmatic
    • Project

Slide 28

Stakeholder Group

WHO?

Slide 29

Stakeholder Group

  • What
    1. Formulate: Oversight, content (refinement), scanning
    2. Evaluate ongoing involvement, merit reviews, development -> acceptance
    3. Outreach networking, market the program, SHRP

Slide 30

Stakeholder Group

  1. Develop Resources $/time/people, general allocation
  2. Address institutional issues procurement, matching & pooling funds, public/private partnerships

Slide 31

Stakeholder Group

  • HOW - Strategic
    • RTCC model
    • Steering Committee Model
    • Others?

Slide 32

Stakeholder Group

  • HOW - Project Level
    • Flexible
    • Merit Review
    • Innovative Technologies

Slide 33

Stakeholder Group

  • HOW Programmatic
    • Advisory Function
    • Shared decision-making
    • Establish criteria for creating theprogram areas
    • Recognize interdisciplinary elements
    • Accommodate non-traditional areas
    • A need to define the context of highway infrastructure

Slide 34

Stakeholder Group

  • Technology
    • Human Resource Pool
      • Education
      • Training
    • Integration of Practice with Research
    • Dissemination of Findings

Slide 35

Stakeholder Group

  • In Summary
    • Input from the stakeholder group
    • Input from the breakout groups
    • Input from ??????
    • There's more to do!!

<< Previous | Contents | Next >>
This page last modified on 04/06/07
  
FHWA Home | Feedback | Privacy Notice

FHWA
United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration