United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway Administration FHWA Home Feedback
   CALENDAR OF EVENTS divider TRAINING divider TECHNOLOGY DEPLOYMENT divider TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE
   Home   divider  end of menu

Photo: Asphalt and concrete roads

Pavement & Materials Home
space image
Pavement & Materials Solutions/Best Practices
space image
Pavement & Materials Training
space image
Pavement & Materials Publications
space image
Pavement & Materials Links
space image
 

FHWA Resource Center

PAVEMENT AND MATERIALS TEAM

Summary of Pavement Warranty Activities in the South

ACTIVITY
STATE
AL AR FL GA KY LA MS NC NM OK SC TN TX

1. Experience with Warranty

1 1   1           1   1  
   A.Number of Projects (#) 1 1 2 1 3 2 1 5 0 1 1   1 11
     HMA 1 1 - 1 1 2 1 4   1 1 3 1 TBD
     PCC 1 1 - 1 1 0 2 1     1 - 1 TBD
Pavement Preservation 1 1 2 1   - 2   - 1 - 1  
   B.Project Completed (#) 1 1 2 1 1 - 2 0 1 1   1 N/A
    HMA 1 1 - 1   - 2   1 1 0 1  
     PCC 1 1 - 1 1 - -   - 1 - 1  
Pavement Preservation 1 1 2 1   - 2   - 1 - 1  

   C. Initial Bid Cost Diff. of Warranty Projects (%)

1 1 UKN 1 UKN UKN VAR1 N/A 22% 1   1 UKN
     HMA 1 1   1   -     22% 1 UKN 1  
     PCC 1 1   1   -     - 1 - 1  

Pavement Preservation

1 1   1   -     - 1 - 1  

   D. Total Cost per Warranty Period (%)

1 1 UKN 1 UKN UKN UKN N/A UKN 1   1 UKN
     HMA 1 1   1   -       1 UKN 1  
     PCC 1 1   1   -       1 - 1  

Pavement Preservation

1 1   1   -       1 - 1  

   E. Initial As-Built Performance Difference (Y/N)

1 1 UKN 1 UKN UKN   N/A UKN 1   1 UKN
    HMA 1 1   1   - -     1 UKN 1  
     PCC 1 1   1   - -     1 - 1  
Pavement Preservation 1 1   1   - N2     1 - 1  

   F. Repairs Done (Y/N)

1 1 N 1 N - N2 N/A N 1 N 1 N

   G. Disputes on Projects (Y/N)

1 1 N 1 N - N N/A N 1 N 1 TBD

   H. Warranty Project Selection Guidelines (Y/N)

1 1 Y 1 Y - N N/A N 1 N 1 N

   I. Has any Increased Cost of Const. Changes been Identified (Y/N)

1 1 UKN 1 N - N N/A UKN 1 UKN 1 TBD

2. New Warranty Projects expected within the next 3 years (Y/N)

1 1 20 1 UKN Y UKN 13 10+ UKN 1 1 1 Y
   A.Legislative mandate? (Y/N) 1 1 N 1 N Y N N N 1 N 1 N
3. Typical Warranty Period (Yrs) 1 1   1 101 3     201 1   1 12
     HMA 1 1   1 10 3 74   201 1 3-5 1  
     PCC 1 1   1 10 3 10   - 1 - 1  
Pavement Preservation 1 1 5 1   - 54 21 - 1 - 1  

(A)    Contractor, DOT, Private, UKN - Unknown TBD - To be determined VAR - Varies

4. Are Longer Periods (10-15 yr) being Considered (Y/N)

1 1 Y 1 N N N N Y 1 Y (15) 1 2
   A.Who will do Mix Design or JMF (A) 1 1 C1 1 C C C C C2 1 C 1 C
   B.Who will do Thickness Design 1 1 D1 1 D2 D D D P 1 D 1 C

5. Typical Bond Amount ($/Mi)

1 1 2 1 3 C 3 5 UKN 3 1 UKN 1 3
   A.Bond for all Repair or Replacement Costs (Y/N) 1 1 Y2 1 Y3 Y 3 Y5 Y Y 1 UKN 1 Y3
   B.Ability to Obtain Bonding an Issue (Y/N) 1 1 N2 1 N4 Y Y5 N N 1 UKN 1 N
   C.Affects on Number and/or Type of Bidders that Participate (Y/N) 1 1 Y 1 N UKN UKN5 N UKN 1 UKN 1 UKN
6. Performance Criteria (X Applicable) 1 1   1   -       1   1 4
   A.Ride 1 1 X 1 X - X   X 1 - 1 X
   B.Cracking (Transverse) 1 1 X 1 X X X   X 1 - 1 X
   C.Cracking (Longitudinal) 1 1 X 1 X X X   X 1 - 1 X
   D.Rutting 1 1 X 1 X X X   X 1 - 1 X
   E.Faulting 1 1   1 X X X   N/A 1 - 1 X
   F.Visual Distress 1 1 X 1 X X 4   X N 1 X 1 X
   G.Other 1 1   1 X5 X 4 X6   4 1 X1 1 X
7.Performance Measurement Freq. (Yrs) 1 1 X5 1 5 5 X7     1 N/A2 1 N/A
8. Who Gathers Perform. Data (A) 1 1 D 1 D6 D D7 D P5 1 D 1 D
9. Reduces Standard Specs & Procedure Requirements 1 1 Y4 1 Y N 6 Y8   6 1 N3 1  
10. General Information - If yes, please provide details on separatesheet (Y/N) 1 1   1   -       1   1  
   A.Contact Point for Information 1 1 6 1 7 7 9 4 7 1 4 1 5
   B.Reasons for not Using 1 1   1   -       1 - 1  
   C.Advantages Identified 1 1   1   -       1 Y5 1 TBD
   D.Disadvantages Identified 1 1   1   -       1 Y6 1 TBD

(A)    Contractor, DOT, Private, UKN - UnknownTBD - To be determined VAR - Varies

Alabama Notes:

Alabama has no experience with warranties and no plans for warranty projects in the foreseeable future.

Arkansas notes:

Arkansas has no experience with warranties and no plans for warranty projects in the foreseeable future.

Florida notes:

We are justgetting started in Florida.Our plan is to eventually only specifyactual performance for a given period (15-25 years) and allowthe contractor to select the type of pavement, thickness, etc.However we are starting slow and at this time require only a 5-yearwarranty.The contractor will do the design for structural mixesand submit to FDOT for information.Due to the subjective natureof the OGFC design process, FDOT will do the mix design for OGFC.Design thickness will be determined by FDOT.Contractor will berequired to follow FDOT's mix design, production and placementspecifications and procedures while the warranty period is limitedto five years.As the warranty period gets longer, the contractorwill be allowed more latitude on how to build the project. Thefirst two jobs were built with a 5 year warranty and a warrantybond with the amount of the bond set by FDOT.The next 8 jobs willbe part of an Economic Stimulus Program and will be Design Build.For these jobs the warranty bond has been replaced with a requirementthat the Responsible Party (could be the prime or the HMA subcontractor)repair the deficiency, or they will be removed from the approvedbidders list for 6 months.

The bondamount was determined on the first two jobs by determining thecost to replace the top 1.5 - 2" of the 2-3" overlay.Itwas presumed that within the first five years this would coverthe cost of any repair this might incur.While it was expectedthat the amount of the bond might have a substantial effect onthe bid, the low bidders were large companies that were self-insured and therefore the actual cost of the bond was not an issue.However,the Contracting Industry in Florida has indicated that this is,in general, a significant issue.

The specification includes threshold valuesfor the individual years for deficiencies like raveling in additionto threshold values for the full five years.

The DOT does not conduct any sampling or testing. The contractorsubmits the result of their quality control sampling and testing.

The Department will conduct a LOT-by-LOT pavement conditionsurvey (PCS) of the pavement following the final acceptance ofthe project, and at intermediate times as determined necessary by the Engineer

For additional information contact Jim Musselman, FDOT, jim.musselman@dot.state.fl.usor Greg Schiess, FHWA, Florida Division,greg.schiess@fhwa.dot.gov

Georgia Notes:

Georgia has no experience with warranties and no plans for warranty projects in the foreseeable future.

Kentucky Notes:

We have bid three warranty projects to date in Kentucky.The first project was bid with alternate pavement types and a mandatory 5-year warranty with an incentive to extend the warranty through year 10.This project was awarded to a concrete contractor with a 10-year warranty.The second project was bid with a fixed 10-year warranty and was not awarded due to the high bids.This project was re-let without a warranty and was awarded.The third project was also bid with a 10-year warranty and alternate pavement types and was awarded to an asphalt contractor.

For the first two projects the Cabinet prepared the pavement designs.For the last project the concrete and asphalt industries submitted recommended pavement designs along with detailed Life Cycle Cost Analysis and research documentation to support their designs to the Cabinet that were eventually used for bidding.

The amount of the bond was determined by multiple methods for each project.The user cost associated with either an asphalt mill and resurface or a PCC diamond grinding were evaluated along with the actual costs of performing these repairs.The final bond amounts were determined using the greater of these numbers.

The bonding companies were contacted prior to each project to involve them in the process and make sure they understood the contract documents.Prior to the last warranty project there was some reluctance on the part of the bonding agencies to assure that they would be able to bond the project.However, the project did have two bidders and was awarded.

The distress parameters were identified for both asphalt and PCC pavement.The parameters evaluated were as follows:

Asphalt'
Cracks
Rutting
Open, Separated and Raveling Joints
Potholes Patching
Raveling, Flushing and Bleeding
Roughness (This was the only parameter that has values listed for each year of the warranty) PCC
Cracks
Faulting at Joints and Cracks
Spalling and Deterioration at Joints and Cracks
Scaling and Map Cracking
Blowups and Shattered Panels
Joint Sealing
Patching
Popouts
Roughness (This parameter has specific values for each year of the warranty)

The Cabinet will perform roughness measurements as a part of our Pavement Management System.The University of Kentucky has been contracted to perform all other testing and to compile the data for use by the Warranty Joint Evaluation Review Team.

For additional information contact Paul Looney, Kentucky Transportation Cabinet at (502) 564-3280 or at Paul.Looney@mail.state.ky.us

Louisiana Notes:

Louisiana is just starting with warranty work.Two hot mix projects have been let, however, construction has not begun.

We have a final special provision for PCC warranty projects and LADOT is now looking for a project to implement it.

At this time the warranty bond is set to 50% of the full contract amount.Thiswill vary fromproject to project depending on the construction details.The bond is intended to cover either the necessary repairs or replacement if needed.Therefore it is possible the 50% of full contract amount could be reduced if that value is higher than needed to cover the cost.

Potholes, edge cracking, fatigue cracking, raveling, bleeding and shoving.

The specifications have threshold limits for each of the distresses.

All of the specification requirements and testing specified on non-warranty projects still apply to warranty projects.The warranty project is merely a regular project with a three-year warranty attached.

For additional information contact Phil Arena, FHWA, Louisiana Division, philip.arena@fhwa.doe.gov

New Mexico:

New Mexico has only one pavement warranty project so far, and this was for a 118 mile long project which had a 20 year pavement warranty.The cost of that pavement warranty was $39,600,000.This project was completed Nov 30, 2001, and so any warranty provisions for repair/reconstruction have not been enacted this early.An overall "developer"bid on the total project, with the developer being paid for design and construction engineering ($46,320,000) and a pavement warranty ($39,600,000) and a 10 year structures warranty ($15,680,000).

The developer did the pavement thickness design.Each of the four contractors did the Job Mix Design, with verification by the developer.

The developer provided a payment and performance bond, which covered both the amount for design and construction engineering, and for the pavement and structures warranty.

Other distresses in the 20 year warranty were:skid resistance, raveling, delamination, potholes, depressions and shoving.

The developer.

The developer created entirely new specifications for this project.

For more details on this project, contact Steve Von Stein in the FHWA New Mexico Division Office at steven.von.stein@fhwa.dot.gov.

Mississippi Notes:

Mississippi let its first pavement warranty project (HMA overlay project) in April 2000.Since then one additional HMA overlay project, two HMA full depth projects, and one full depth PCCP project have been let.Initial engineer's estimates for these projects were approximately 5% above the engineer's estimates for similar non-warranty projects.Of the five projects awarded: bids ranged from 3.3% below to 9.5% above the engineer's estimate for the four HMA projects and the bid for the PCCP project was 13.9% above the engineer's estimate.Bid prices on the individual pavement components were basically the same as for non-warrantied components.Higher bid prices were instead received on several non-pavement items on these warranted projects - thus resulting in the overall total bid amounts being above the engineer's estimate on three out of the five projects.

The two 5-year warranty, HMA overlay projects are the only two warranty projects on which initial construction has been completed.These projects were both completed this past winter.No repairs required to date.

Only one additional warranty project is currently scheduled to be let later this Fiscal Year.Additional ones are expected on upcoming Interstate pavement rehabilitation projects within the next three years.

Mississippi's first two warranty projects (HMA overlay projects) included a 5-year warranty period. Since then, HMA warranty projects have included a 7-year warranty period.

Mississippi developed its first HMA warranty specification in 1999.Per initial meetings with the contracting industry, bonding for warranty projects was a concern.The initial draft of the specifications for a five-year warranty project contained provisions outlining that the contractor would be responsible for the HMA mixtures, the pavement performance, and warranty work, for the finished roadway for a period of five years following the date of the final construction inspection.The provisions stated that contract bond along with the necessary warranty bond(s) for the HMA pavement would be in effect for the total five-year warranty period.There was concern by the industry and their lawyers over the use of the wording "warranty."There was concern with the specifications possibly making them liable for more than just the pavement structure.There was concern over obtaining adequate insurance.

The first project (HMA overlay project) was let in October 1999.No bids were received.To eliminate the above stated concerns, the specs were reworded - now, instead of the use of the word "warranty" and "warranty bond", the specs contain the word "maintain."Portions of the specs now read "The contractor will maintain the finished roadway and ramps for a period of__ years.""Upon final inspection of the ____ pavement, a single term __- year maintenance bond (or any multiple of other length maintenance bonds equaling __- years) will be in effect for the entire maintenance period.""The __- year maintenance bond will be $________ for the ____ pavement."Provisions covering Third Party Rights were also added to the specifications.

For the latest, 7-year warrantied HMA projects, the specs require a maintenance bond of $1,000,000 for one and $1,300,000 for the other for the maintained pavement.For the 10-year warrantied PCCP project, the specs require a maintenance bond of $1,500,000 for the maintained pavement.These dollar amounts are based on the costs of remedial measures - an adequate overlay of the entire project.The $/mile used for each project can be obtained yet, if needed. Mississippi specifications include other distress types (and thresholds for each).These additional distresses include alligator cracking, block cracking, reflective cracking, edge cracking, potholes, ravelling, segregation, surface bleeding, friction numbers, corner breaks, joint seal damage, longitudinal joint spalling, transverse joint spalling, and map cracking.Mississippi will use the SHRP-P-338 Distress Identification Manual for measuring distresses.

MDOT will conduct the distress surveys annually - the first occurring one year after the final construction inspection date.

MDOT specs require that, prior to the start of construction, the Contractor shall provide the Department with a Project Management Plan which will include but not be limited to: the proposed Job Mix Formula (JMF), the method of developing the JMF, all JMF testing, a list of materials and their test properties, a quality control plan and construction plan that includes lift thickness and lane widths. The purpose of the Contractor's Project Management Plan is to provide sufficient information to adequately inform the Department of proposed project activities.of the project.The contractor is also responsible for all quality control testing of mixture properties and roadway density during construction. No actions are required of MDOT personnel during these stages.

Upon completion of warrantyprojects, MDOT will conduct skid testing on all projects, will check cores for thicknesses on PCCP projects, and then will perform the annual distress surveys.

For additional information contact Roger McWilliams, FHWA, Mississippi Division, rmcwilliams@ms.fhwa.dot.gov or Brad Lewis, MDOT, Construction Division, blewis@mdot.state.ms.us

North Carolina Notes:

At the present time, NC is only working toward warranting its chip seals.

Other than planning for chip seal warranties, no other action in currently under way with respect to pavement warranties.

NC anticipates final surface warranties in the future.Implementation date is uncertain.

George Gibson, NCDOT,ggibson@dot.state.nc.us or Jim Phillips, FHWA, NC Division, jim.phillips@fhwa.dot.gov

Oklahoma Notes:

Oklahoma has no experience with warranties and no plans for warranty projects in the foreseeable future.

South Carolina Notes:

Like many others, we are just now getting involved with warranties.We currently have 3 projects under contract, all of which are also Design/Build contracts.These are short-term warranties for new HMA pavements.We are presently developing a longer-term warranty that will most likely have skid, rutting, ride and distress index as performance measures.

If defective work or materials is suspected, the DOT may conduct any testing deemed appropriate to determine quality of in-place material.

Performance measure is subjective. If visual defects appear at any time during the life of the warranty, DOT will determine cause of defect and involve contractor if defects are due to substandard workmanship or materials.

All of our warranty pavements were constructed as part of Design/Build projects.Changes in testing were result of the Design/Build process, and not influenced by the presence of a warranty.

David Law - FHWA Pavement & Materials Engineer, South Carolina Division, david.law@fhwa.dot.gov

In past, once the DOT accepted the project, the contractor was free and clear.Now, they are still responsible for failures due to substandard materials or workmanship during the life of the warranty.

A 3-5 year warranty is still relatively meaningless on a new construction project, which is designed for a much longer period.The meaning of substandard workmanship is vague.

Tennessee Notes:

Tennessee has no experience with warranties and no plans for warranty projects in the foreseeable future.

Texas Notes:

The Texas Turnpike Authority, a Division of TXDOT, has issued a request for proposals on a 90 mile new freeway project in Central Texas.The proposal allows for bids on either Asphalt Concrete or continuously reinforced concrete paving.The project is an exclusive development agreement, a design-build type project.The proposal calls for a 1 year warranty on all major elements, including pavements, and a 15 year warranty agreement to be implemented at the TTA's option.

TTA's thought is that a longer warranty period's additional up-front cost can be avoided by having the option of implementing a long term maintenance contract that the developer has bid on.

5% of the entire proposal price is bonded.75% of the entire maintenance proposal is bonded.

The warranty for AC and or concrete pavement reads:"No displacement greater than ¼" in a ten foot length longitudinally and ½" in a ten foot length transversely or defects greater than specified in Section 3.2.2 of the Capital Maintenance Agreement.No ponded water on pavement surface longer than 10 minutes after a rainstorm.No scaling or spalling."Section 3.2.2 of the maintenance agreement contains the following performance criteria:rutting > ¼", cracks > ¼" wide, patching shall be flush with surrounding pavement, no dropoffs > 4", clean and reseal joints where sealant has failed.

Brett Jackson, Central Texas Turnpike Project Engineer, FHWA Texas Division, brett.jackson@fhwa.dot.gov.Turnpike office # : (512) 225-1337 or Jim Travis, Pavement and Materials Engineer, FHWA Texas Division Office, james.travis@fhwa.dot.gov. , Phone (512) 536-5922.

State law prohibits TXDOT from letting warranty projects at this time.TTA has special authority to enter into "Exclusive Agreement" contracts to design, build, operate and maintain toll facilities.When awarded, TTA's two projects will be Texas' first experience with warranty type projects.

The State Comptrollers Office has released a report on Texas' delivery of the highway program, with one of the strong recommendations that TXDOT use more innovative financing, design-build, and warranties, to better meet the growing transportation needs in Texas.TXDOT is concerned that they may go from a prohibition on warranties to a legislative mandate for warranties after the next legislative secession.We currently have several efforts underway to determine parameters we should consider if warranties are allowed or required in the future.

FHWA Resource Center logo
yellow circle
CONTACT US
staff / phones

Technical Service Teams
Air Quality

Civil Rights

Construction & Project Mgmt

Environment

Finance Services

Geotechnical

Hydraulics

Operations

Pavement & Materials

Planning

Safety & Design

Structures

FHWA Logo

FHWA Home | Feedback
United States Department of Transportation · Federal Highway Administration