Benchmarking for Maintenance Operations

1
Roadside Assessment in North Carolina
2008 Maintenance Quality Assurance Peer
Exchange Raleigh, NC
Jonathan L. Arnold, PE Infrastructure Management
Engineer NCDOT State Road Maintenance Unit
2
Overview

• North Carolinas Highway System
• Performance Based Management
• Assessing the Systems Roadside Condition
• Measuring Outcomes
• Next Steps and The Future..

3
Interstates US Routes
6,689 Road Miles
4
Interstates, US NC Routes
14,805 Road Miles
5
All NCDOT Maintained
79,009 Road Miles
6
NC State Highway System

• 79,009 road miles
• 158,592 paved lane miles
• 4,876 miles of unpaved roads
• 17,147 structures
• 86.5 M sf bridge deck area

7
Performance Based Management

• Uses data/statistical evidence to determine
  progress toward established goals/outcomes
• Measures efficiency, effectiveness of programs
  and operations
• Simple, understandable, logical, and shows a
  trend over time
• Improves the condition of highway system and
  reduces life cycle costs

• Allows better communication with legislature and
  public
• Better able to allocate resources to most needed
  work

8
North Carolinas Goals

• Move from reactive to strategic/outcome based
• Clearly define mission expectations for
  operations
• Develop strategies resulting in improved
  efficiency, performance, preservation
  consistent with the Statewide Long Range Plan
• Develop management tools/systems to measure
  outcomes performance
• Management flexibility with accountability

9
Assessing the Systems Roadside Condition
10
Assessing the Condition of the Highway System
11
Maintenance Condition Survey
12
Maintenance Condition Survey
13
Maintenance Condition Survey
14
(No Transcript)
15
2006 Large System / Large Sample Size
16
2008 Large System / LARGER Sample Size
Number of required samples increased by 66
Since 2006!!!
17
Other 2006-2008 Roadside Adjustments

• Litter
• 2006 Total count up to 200 pieces
• 2008 Pass/Fail (Fails if Litter is gt 100
  pieces)
• Mowing
• 2006 Measured avg. grass height
• 2008 Pass/Fail
• Slopes
• No longer assessed

18
Measuring the Outcomes2006 MCAP Results
19
Condition Assessment Funding Needs for North
Carolinas Highway System
Report to the Joint Legislative Transportation
Oversight Committee
December 12, 2006
Lacy D. Love, PE
20
Survey Findings - Primary
Pavements PCR 83.5
Traffic Control Pvmt Markers 35 Pvmt
Markings 7
21
Survey Findings - Primary
Shoulders Ditches Low Shoulders 14
Shoulders Ditches Blocked ditches 4
22
Survey Findings - Primary
Roadside Litter Debris 91pcs
Roadside Brush Tree 49
Roadside Guardrail 1
23
(No Transcript)
24
RoadwayLevel of Service
Interstate
Primary
Secondary
25
Level of Service A
Level of Service B
26
Level of Service C
Level of Service D
Level of Service F
27
Primary Pavement Condition
Percent
Years 1984 - 2006
28
Secondary Pavement Condition
Percent
Years 1984 - 2006
29
Next Steps (as seen in 2006)

• Increased focus on preventive maintenance
• Clearly defined performance expectations for
  operations
• Data driving the Divisions decision making
• Highest best use of resources
• Further funding methodology changes
• Continue to revise measurement tools

30
The Future..

• Handheld Data Collection Technology
• GPS Devices
• Permanent Assessors
• Increased Consistency
• Reduced Potential for Bias
• Better Trained
• Result in the Reduction in of Assessors?

31
The Future..

• Incorporation of Assessment Data into our
  Maintenance Management System as a planning aid.
• Comparison of our Performance Based Maintenance
  Contract to our own operations.
• The use of Geographic Information Systems to view
  assessment data spatially to allow for additional
  analysis and planning.

32
The Future..
33
Questions?