## Transportation Curriculum Coordination Council

**Division Office Survey Results**

**April 2001**

## 

The following survey results have been received from the various
division offices responding to the survey questions posed to the FHWA
Field Offices. Many thanks to those of you who took the time to send in
your answers and making this a successful survey. We also wish to thank
Sheryl Snyder from FHWA's Montana Division Office for assisting in
collating the answers.

###### Subject: Qualification Programs

**1)** If your state is part of a Regional Certification Group do you
feel that the regional group is helping your State Transportation Agency
(STA) become [more efficient]{.underline} towards meeting the intent of
23 CFR 637 on Laboratory and Sampling and Testing Personnel
Qualification [compared to not having joined a regional
group]{.underline}?

**Non-Regional Group State Questions**

**2A)** For Non-Regional Certification Group States, what about the
[efficiency]{.underline} of those STA\'s who are working independently
towards meeting the intent of 23 CFR 637 on Laboratory and Sampling and
Testing Personnel Qualification?

**2B)** Has your state been coordinating with a regional group to assist
in developing their own individual programs?

**2C)** Do you feel that if those State Transportation Agencies joined
one of the 5 regional certification groups it would help them to meet
the intent of the regulations?

**All States Questions**

**3)** Do you feel as though your state has met the intent of the 23 CFR
Regulations? We are looking for the total percent of states who feel
that they have met the intent of the regulations.

**4)** Can you share any success stories or positive aspects from your
state technician qualification programs that we could share with others?

**5)** Do you recommend any areas of improvement for the technician
certification programs in general? Topics for our national group to
maybe focus on?

**6)** Are you aware of any states using reciprocity as of yet? Between
which states? Approximately how many personnel in number?

**7)** Please send us the name, phone number and email address for your
State Transportation Agency counterpart in charge of their certification
programs. We have only been communicating with the regional groups to
date and would like to keep the rest of the states in the loop.

Thanks John A. Perry, C&M Engineer, Washington DC

Office of Infrastructure / Asset Management ph 202-366-2023

## Subject: Qualification Programs Survey Results

**[Question #1]{.underline}** - If your state is part of a Regional
Certification Group do you feel that the regional group is helping your
State Transportation Agency (STA) become more efficient towards meeting
the intent of 23 CFR 637 on Laboratory and Sampling and Testing
Personnel Qualification compared to not having joined a regional group?

A: AK Yes.

A: CA - Our regional certification group is the Western Alliance for
Quality in Transportation Construction (WAQTC). Our state DOT has
elected to NOT participate in the proliferation and development of WAQTC
standards. For now they are satisfied with their existing process for
qualification/certification of materials samplers and testers. At the
same time they have asked to be kept abreast of WAQTC developments. Our
state DOT efforts to comply with 23 CFR 637 were independent of WAQTC.

A: CO - CDOT has joined the WAQTC but is limiting the
qualifications/certifications to Soils Module. This decision was done to
facilitate getting a qualifications program online in only one year
since CDOT had not done anything to that end prior to 1999.

A: CT - Yes, I believe working as a team with the other new England
States, NETTCP has made meeting the intent of 23 CRF 637 much more
efficient.

A: DC Yes, MID-ATLANTIC STATES REGION TECHNICIAN CERTIFICATION PROGRAM

A: FL- Florida and the SE just started a group and yes I believe it will
help. I hope that we can do what some of the Mid west states have done,
specifically develop joint specifications like HMA, bases etc.

A: HI - HDOT belongs to the WAQTC, western states group, and belonging
to the WAQTC has been of great help to the Hawaii DOT.

A: IA- Yes. Our regional group has been sharing information for about 6

> years. This has benefited all who have been involved.

A: ID YES. ITD, VERY EARLY, RECOGNIZED THE VALUE OF SUCH A GROUP AND WAS
A PRIME MOVER IN DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE WESTERN ALLIANCE
FOR QUALITY TRANSPORTATION CONSTRUCTION (WAQTC) S&T PERSONNEL
QUALIFICATION PROGRAM. ITD HAS DEVELOPED ITS OWN LAB QUALIFICATION
PROGRAM, WHICH IS ALSO APPROVED.

A: IN - Yes, the Indiana Department is part of the M-TRAC activities.
Their participation has brought several items to the table that both the
DOT and myself were not aware of and as such have incorporated them our
program. I believe as well as the DOT believes that participation in a
group like this opens up the communication lines that all benefits from.

A: IL Illinois is not part of a regional certification group.

A: LA LA is part of the Southeast regional group. LA already had an
extensive training and certification program for QC/QA prior to 1995.
The regional group has had no impact on LA\'s on-going program.

A: MD Maryland is part of the Mid-Atlantic Region Technician
Certification Program. All participating states are benefiting through
the regional efforts. Efficiency/benefits that we think we are enjoying
and/or will result are: 1) Increased knowledge through sharing of best
practices and problems 2) Replacement of individual states Standard Test
Methods with standardized regional test methods. Our Soils and Aggregate
group has developed two regional test methods that will be submitted to
AASHTO. 3) Shared cost in the development and printing of manuals. 4)
Reciprocity among member states - a huge benefit to contractors working
in several states. Many more..

A: ME Absolutely. NETTCP has been a huge plus for Maine.

A: MI MICHIGAN IS NOT PART OF A REGIONAL CERTIFICATION GROUP

A: MN Minnesota is not part of a Regional Certification Group.

A: MT Definitely! Participation in a regional group has been invaluable
in planning and implementing a strategy. Other benefits include
standardization, synergy, and ability to help each other formulate
schedules and plans.

A: ND North Dakota is not part of a regional group.

A: NE Probably not, but, it will possibly help keep them aware of what
is going on in the surrounding States and help them keep up on
improvements to the process.

A: NC NC is part of the Southeastern Task Force on Technician Training
and Qualification. Their goals are geared to sharing information on
individual qualification programs rather than developing a Regional
Program

A: NH - Yes, NH and the other States formed the NETTCP program because
none of the States had the resources to formulate certification programs
on their own. I attended some of the early meetings and can recall the
discussions and decisions to share tasks in order to get the programs
established in a timely manner. I think there was more accountability
during the whole development process too, because one state did not want
to cause a delay to the others.

A: NJ- Currently the NJDOT is part of the Mid-Atlantic Region Technician
Certification Program (MARTCP). The Department joined this group in 1999
and we have been participating in establishing certification Programs
for HMA, PC Concrete, Soils/Aggregates, and Pavement Markings. Prior to
joining MARTCP, the Department established, and continues to maintain,
certification programs for HMA, PCC, and Soils/Aggregates as well as
participating in the AASHTO Accreditation Program (AAP). Since the
MARTCP is not fully implemented, no additional efficiency has been
realized to date.

A: NM - New Mexico has just recently decided to join the WAQTC. The main
reason is to take advantage of some of their inspector training modules
outside those of soils, aggregates, HMA, Profilograph, and Nuclear
Densometer. New Mexico has met the intent of 23 CFR 637 through their
own Technician Training and Certification Program (TTCP) in cooperation
with the Associated Contractors of New Mexico. ACI certification has
been accepted for concrete inspectors.

A: NV - Nevada is part of the WAQTC. They have established a NAQTC,
allowing adjacent states inspectors to work in Nevada. They may have to
take a few specific Nevada tests before than can become fully certified.
The deadline is scheduled for January 1, 2002. We gave NDOT an extension
until the end of 2003, since they do not have the budget resources to
get all their inspectors tested right away.

A: OK- Oklahoma does not belong to a regional certification group.
However, they do coordinate activities with the Western group.

A: OR Oregon is part of the Western Alliance for Quality Transportation
Construction (WAQTC). This group is not helping Oregon, the group is
more about providing a training manual that states can base their
materials technician training on. Oregon is way a head of the other
states as far as the QC/QA program and training. Oregon will be meeting
the intent of 23 CFR 637.

A: PR We are not part of a Regional Certification Program

A: RI YES, the establishment of the NETTCP has enabled RIDOT and the
other relatively small New England states to pool their resources and
develop a program to meet the 23CFR Qualification requirement.

A: SC - South Carolina does not belong to a Regional Certification
Group.

A: SD - The South Dakota Department of Transportation has not joined any
of the Regional Certification Programs. The Department does accept the
national ACI "Concrete Field Testing Technicians -- Grade 1
certification for personnel sampling and testing fresh concrete.

A: TN - Tennessee Dept. Of Transportation (TDOT) is not in any such
group; and is not particularly interested.

A: TX - Texas Department of Transportation (TxDOT) is not part of a
Regional Certification Group for qualification of their sampling and
testing personnel.

A: UT RESPONSE: The Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT) currently
is a member of the Western Alliance for Quality Transportation
Construction (WAQTC). The WAQTC program is managed by the Materials
Section in the UDOT\'s Headquarters Office. The WAQTC requirements apply
to all personnel that perform acceptance, verification and independent
assurance sampling and testing. There is more efficiency and consistency
in the program when it is administered by the Central Materials Section.
Prior to joining the WAQTC, the UDOT had a tiered personnel
qualification program. The central materials laboratory was AASHTO
accredited. The central materials laboratory conducted the qualification
program for the UDOT region laboratories and the region laboratories
conducted the qualification program for the individual project crews.
Both qualification programs were approved by the division office as
meeting the requirements of 23 CFR 637B. The Central Materials Section
maintains a data base on all qualified sampling and testing personnel.
The information is available to all UDOT personnel, and should become
available to persons outside the UDOT in the near future. The data base
will be very useful in exercising the reciprocity element of the WAQTC
program.

A: VA -- Yes.

A: VT Yes

A: WA- We are a member of WAQTC, but in name only.

#### Non-Regional Group State Questions

**[Question \# 2A -]{.underline}** For Non-Regional Certification Group
States, what about the efficiency of those STA\'s who are working
independently towards meeting the intent of 23 CFR 637 on Laboratory and
Sampling and Testing Personnel Qualification?

A: CA - Our state DOT efforts to comply with 23CFR637 began when the
regulation was first issued in 1995 and continued up to the June 2000
deadline. During that time the state DOT Independent Assurance Manual
was revised into compliance with 23CFR637. Most likely the efficiency of
the state meeting the intent of 23CFR637 was unaffected by WAQTC.

A: CO - CDOT has an Independent asphalt lab training & certification in
cooperation with the local NAPA chapter called Laboratory Certification
of Asphalt Technicians (LabCAT). This effort was partially funded by
FHWA in the early 90\'s to get it up & running.

A: FL - Interesting question, the requirements were to be met last June
and therefore Florida elected to develop all new training programs
themselves and not wait until other states in the SE developed. Yes that
was not efficient, but effective.

A: IL Illinois has developed an extensive technician certification
program that fully meets the regulations. They have not had much
interest in regional groups for a number of reasons, as follows: a. The
state has developed an ongoing relationship with a junior college to do
most of the training. This removes the administrative burden from the
DOT and fits in with the junior college mission. b. The state tests are
based on AASHTO specifications and tests. These procedures contain
options, and this allows the state to teach the options implemented in
Illinois. c. The courses are also designed around the state
specifications so that technicians know the meaning of the tests and the
appropriate actions. d. The courses are designed to fit together so that
each is the prerequisite of the next. For example, the asphalt quality
control manager requires four weeks of intensive training. e. The issue
of reciprocity has been an infrequent one. It has been so infrequent
that it is not worth a significant investment in coordination of a
curriculum with other states. Illinois has had one or two requests per
year for consideration, and they are handled on an individual basis. For
example, a technician with training and experience may have to only
demonstrate competency or pass a test, with no course work.

A: KY Decisions have been made. State believes that decisions needed to
be made to best fit their program.

A: MI - MICHIGAN HAS THUS FAR BEEN ABLE TO MEET THE DEMAND FOR CERTIFIED
TESTERS WITH THEIR OWN CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS. FOR LABORATORIES THEY USE
FORMAL CERTIFICATION BY THE ACCREDITATION PROGRAMS AMRL AND CCRL FOR THE
MICHIGAN DOT CENTRAL LABORATORY AND THEY USE AN IN-HOUSE DEVELOPED
CHECKLIST TO QUALIFY FIELD LABORATORIES

A: MN - Efficiency is adequate

A: NC NC feels that their program was already fairly well developed, and
working toward adapting their program was more efficient than developing
a region wide program.

A: ND - North Dakota met the deadline of June 2000 and is currently
compliant. It is recognized that further refinement is needed to make
the NDDOT's qualification program more efficient.

A: NM New Mexico in cooperation with the Associated Contractors of New
Mexico has an outstanding Technician Training and Certification Program
(TTCP) in the areas of sampling and testing for soils, aggregates, HMA
including SuperPave, Profilograph, and Nuclear Densometer. This program
has been fully operational for over three years. ACI certification has
been accepted for concrete in New Mexico. It has recently been agreed
that the Chairman of the TTCP Board and the Chairman of the Local ACI
Chapter would be invited to each others meetings to facilitate
communication between the Boards. Prior to developing New Mexico\'s
TTCP, the State visited Colorado and Texas to look at their programs.
Being impressed by both programs, the State in cooperation with the
ACNM, developed their program taking much from both Colorado and Texas.

A: OK- We have state law that requires testers to be certified, and as
of 1/2001 all personnel (state/contractor) that is doing testing is now
certified. I do not that Oklahoma will benefit joining a group, since
they have their program up and going.

A: PR We are moving very slowly. We hope that, with a new administration
at the Highway and Transportation Authority, things improve.

A: SC - South Carolina has made a concerted effort to expand their
certification process to comply with the regulations. It was a conscious
decision to go it alone.

A: SD - Implementing a Regional Certification program would not have
saved the Department much time or work. Many of the Department's
training courses had been held for years and it just needed to be
updated. The Departments current program is working very well and meets
their individual needs. The Department is now considering developing
their own certification course for sampling and testing fresh concrete.
Then technicians can be either certified through the Department's
training course or ACI.

A: TN - We have no way to compare. Our state's certification surrounded
what they already have in motion, except for training in soils and
aggregates accomplished by the Univ. of Tennessee. Continuing training
is part of TDOT'S ongoing program; in the past and in the future. The
one time effort for 100% of the soils and aggregates, personnel was not
too awkward.

A: TX - TxDOT developed their own personnel qualification program after
23 CFR 637(B) went into effect.

A: WA- Washington State feels that they have met the intent of the
federal regulation. WSDOT has never allowed contractor testing on WSDOT
projects, so they have had a testing program in place for years. Our
regulation, did however force them to develop a more formal procedure,
something that would qualify a person as \"qualified\".

A: WY Wyoming was requested by the Western Alliance for Quality
Transportation Construction (WAQTC) to join that regional program. A
joint group‑‑WCA, WYDOT, UW, FHWA evaluated the Wyoming program versus
the WAQTC program during the winter of 1999. Benefits/drawbacks to WAQTC
membership were identified. We concluded that the Wyoming program should
be maintained as it: 1) provided certification based on experience
rather than training and as a result, the certification course was of
shorter length/cost than the WAQTC; 2) provided one certification for
each program area‑soils and aggregates, portland cement concrete,
asphalt concrete‑rather than requiring multiple certifications within a
program area; 3) provided standards directly related to one State's
specifications, sampling and testing procedures, and pay factors rather
than a multitude of State credentials; 4)the WAQTC 3‑year renewal period
would add unnecessary cost to the program.

**[Question \# 2B]{.underline}** - Has your state been coordinating with
a regional group to assist in developing their own individual programs?

A: CA - Yes, but only in developing criteria for two short training
courses, i.e. \"Plant and Street Inspector Training for Asphalt Concrete
Pavement Construction\", and \"Plant and Street Inspector Training for
Portland Cement Concrete Pavement\". At the same time they have asked to
be kept abreast of WAQTC developments.

A: CO - CDOT has not coordinated with any regional group to work up the
program, there is some discussion within CDOT if adding the Asphalt and
PCC and Inspector modules would be worthwhile. CDOT has joined the WAQTC
but is limiting the qualifications / certifications to Soils Module.
This decision was done to facilitate getting a qualifications program
online in only one year since CDOT had not done anything to that end
prior to 1999.

A: FL Yes

A: KY No

A: MI - ALTHOUGH NO DIRECT COORDIANTION, MICHIGAN HAS ATTENDED MANY OF
THE REGIONAL CONFERENCES TO GATHER INFORMATION TO USE IN DEVELOPING
MICHIGAN\'S PROGRAMS

A: NC They have been sharing information with each other in the
Southeastern Task Force on Technician Training and Qualification.

A: ND - The NDDOT did contact several other States and groups and used
ideas gained from those contacts.

A: NM- As mentioned, New Mexico has recently decided to join WAQTC. It
is too early to determine the role the State will play in that
organization.

A: PR No

A: SC- No

A: SD - Members of the working groups that developed the Department's
program attended several of the Technician Certification Workshops that
were held in the old Region 5 & 7 States. We also reviewed copies of the
policies and training course materials from several of the regional
groups.

A: TN - Only to the extent of voicing interests and needs at the
regional meetings. It does not appear to us that TDOT is interested in
much reciprocity.

A: TX TxDOT is not coordinating with a regional group to develop a
regional qualification program.

A:WA- No

A: WY The WAQTC program was reviewed for application in Wyoming; no
other coordination.

**[Question \# 2C -]{.underline}** Do you feel that if those State
Transportation Agencies joined one of the 5 regional certification
groups it would help them to meet the intent of the regulations?

A: CA-- No.

A: CO- CDOT meets the intent of the regulations with the programs they
have in place.

A: FL- It could have, should have, etc

A: KY Decisions have been made and the State feels comfortable with
them.

A: MI NOT NECESSARILY

A: MN No

A: NC No

A: ND- Yes, it likely would have help the NDDOT with compliance, however

> the NDDOT did not find a group that fit its overall needs.

A: NM- The purpose for New Mexico\'s joining WAQTC is not to meet the
intent of 23 CFR 637, but to take advantage of training modules already
developed in areas outside their own TTCP. New Mexico is in compliance
with 23 CFR 637.

A: PR Yes, It seems to me that it would be easier to develop a Program
on a regional basis. In Puerto Rico, Spanish being the main language, it
might not be as easy.

A: SC- Not significantly; it wouldn\'t hurt but I doubt it would help
much if any.

A: SD-- No

A: TN- Not from where we stand. We are not saying, however, that it
might not be helpful elsewhere.

A: TX- We do not know if the 5 regional certification groups are
effective in assisting State Transportation Agencies meet the intent of
the Federal Regulations.

A: WA- No.

A:WY WYOMING--the Wyoming QCQA program has been approved by the Division
as meeting the regulations.

#### All States Questions

**[Question \# 3 -]{.underline}** Do you feel as though your state has
met the intent of the 23 CFR Regulations? We are looking for the total
percent of states who feel that they have met the intent of the
regulations.

A: AK Yes.

A: CA-- Yes.

A: CO - CDOT meets the full intent of the regulation, and have for
several years with the exception of the Soils technicians program that
is now in place.

A: CT - Yes (Although it is an ongoing battle due to State DOT budget
constraints).

A: DC Yes

A: FL- Intent, yes

A: HI - I believe the State has met the intent of 23CFR.

A: IA - Yes. We meet the intent of 23 CFR 637.

A: ID YES. ITD HAS FULLY IMPLEMENTED THE WAQTC S&T PERSONNEL
QUALIFICATION PROGRAM AND ITS OWN LABORATORY QUALIFICATION PROGRAM,
WHICH COMPLY WITH THE CFR.

A: IL Illinois fully complies with 23CFR637. It is continually working
to improve its program.

A: IN- Yes, I do believe the DOT has met the \"intent\" of the
regulation. Also, The DOT (with our concurrence) has updated everything
in their Independent Assurance Program and developed the Qualified
Technician Program. Both programs are intertwined. For example, the IAP
does the proficiency testing/monitoring for the QTP. We also have
involved industry, both HMA and PCC. in the Regulations via our Warranty
and Contractor Acceptance programs, and extended the program into the
Local Public Agency projects via their consultants.

A: KY Yes. Kentucky has made the decisions for their certification
program to benefit them.

A: LA Yes, LA was in compliance before 23 CFR regulations were issued.
LA has made minor modifications to their program to ensure meeting all
FHWA recommendations.

A: ME - Yes, Maine has wholeheartedly bought into NETTCP and includes
certification as a requirement for selected contractor personnel as well
as its own people who are covered by the reg.

A: MD -- Yes

A: MI - YES, IN FACT MICHIGAN HAD BEEN SUPPORTIVE OF THE QUALIFICATION
PROCESS BEFORE IT BECAME FHWA REGULATION.

A: MN-- Yes

A: MT Yes, the intent, but not the drop-dead date. MT has been totally
honest in this regard, much to their credit. Several other States
[and]{.underline} FHWA Division Offices have claimed to have met the
deadline when in fact they have done less and just begun implementation.
We accepted a documented commitment, including an implementation plan
and time line as meeting the intent. MT is about 90% compliant now, and
is ahead of half of their Regional counterparts. State DOT's that are
accurately responding to you and are honest should not be penalized by
be flagged in National statistics or summaries.

A: NC Yes

A: ND -- Yes

A: NE Yes

A: NH - The training courses and examines have been good refresher
courses for older testing personnel and have provided a way to mentor
new people. I have seen inspectors confidence in both test procedures
and use of equipment increase. Contractors\' personnel who do QC testing
on QC/QA projects are also required to be certified which has increased
their ability to test, understanding of the reasons for testing and even
their willingness to reject materials, although this latter result is
mostly tied to the risk of reduced payment under QC/QA specifications

A: NJ- Yes, we feel that the NJDOT has met the intent of 23 CFR 637.

A: NM- New Mexico has met the intent of 23 CFR 637. This does not mean
the program is not without problems. There is a continuing problem of
training, certifying, and keeping certified technicians on both the
State\'s payrolls and contractor payrolls. Because of the continual
turnover in personnel, we have agreed to accepting a ratio of one
certified technician in direct supervision of three formally trained
non-certified technicians in an OJT program. The State and contractors
are continually trying to improve on this ratio in all areas of
certification.

A: NV - Nevada has met the intent of our regulations, and is going one
step beyond - they have put together a program that covers all Nevada
governments (state, city, and county). That is one reason it is taking a
little longer.

A: OK- Yes.

A: OR Yes

A: PR We are at the beginning of the process. We have had several
meetings and correspondence with the PRHTA. They have the intention and
named a consultant to assist on the effort, but it has been difficult
getting the process rolling.

A: RI Yes, note however that this is an on-going process as we continue
to train and qualify technicians each year. We are looking for the total
percent of states who feel that they have met the intent of the
regulations.

A: SC-- Yes.

A: SD - Yes The Department implemented certification programs for the
sampling and testing of soils, aggregates, asphalt, concrete and
Certification programs for inspectors in earthwork, structures, concrete
paving, concrete plants, asphalt construction.

A: TN- We accepted their plan. We can't expect too much, with no
authority to go along with it.

A: TX - We believe TxDOT's Quality Assurance (QA) Program meets the
intent of 23 CFR 637 (B).

A: UT RESPONSE: The division office approved the UDOT\'s Quality
Assurance Program on August 31, 1999. The program met all the
requirements of 23 CFR 637B.

A: VA -- Yes.

A: VT Yes

A: WA- Yes, I feel that WSDOT has met the intent of the regulation. They
have developed a qualified tester program, have Independent Assurance
inspectors who teach the new employees how to perform the test. HQ Mat
Lab has recently begun doing audits/reviews to see how well the program
is functioning.

A: WY WYOMING--Yes, the structural concrete program has and continues to
present different challenges to implementation, since highway related
structural concrete is not a large market, small suppliers are involved,
point of material acceptance, shared responsibility between contractor
and supplier.

**Question \# 4 -** Can you share any success stories or positive
aspects from your state technician qualification programs that we could
share with others?

A: CA - The training and qualifications were accomplished at the
district level. There was no secret to their success: the training
coordinators had to work very hard to conduct an outreach program to
their samplers and testers in the public and private sectors. They had
to schedule training, conduct the training, test the participants and
keep records of their successes and failures. This work continues.

A: CO - CDOT and Industry have worked very well together to meet the
regulation and it has lead to an improvement in communication and
understanding of points of view. CDOT has an Independent asphalt lab
training & certification in cooperation with the local NAPA chapter
called Laboratory Certification of Asphalt Technicians (LabCAT). This
effort was partially funded by FHWA in the early 90\'s to get it up &
running.

A: CT - Generally the responses from people who have attended the NETTCP
courses has been favorable

A: DC TOO NEW TO EVALUATE

A: FL - Old, outdated training materials were completely updated for
aggregates, earthwork, concrete, and asphalt. Two training facilities
were built specifically for training with labs. I hope that we can do
what some of the Mid west states have done, specifically develop joint
specifications like HMA, bases etc. Positive aspect - Florida\'s
manuals, class materials, etc., are available at no charge but they
would like to get copies from the SHA requesting Florida\'s recently, it
has greatly helped contractors and producers understand their products
better, resulting in improved quality control and contractor compliance.
Our regulation, did however force them to develop a more formal
procedure, something that would qualify a person as \"qualified\".

> A: HI- The State technicians who took the training program and passed
> the tests and were certified in general were happy they had the chance
> to have training and being certified. Many felt they learned something
> and being certified gave them a sense of accomplishment and authority.

A: IA - We have had a certification program in effect for over 30 years.
Most uniformity of testing that was needed. Some options needed to be
eliminated.

A: ID AS A RESULT OF THE LABORATORY AND S&T PERSONNEL QUALIFICATION
PROGRAMS, ITD HAS IDENTIFIED AND REPLACED DEFICIENT PROJECT TESTING
EQUIPMENT. KNOWLEDGABLE INSPECTORS ARE MUCH MORE AWARE OF WHAT THEY NEED
TO DO THEIR JOBS. ITD IS CURRENTLY DEVELOPING A PARALLEL CONSTRUCTION
INSPECTOR QUALIFICATION PROGRAM.

A: IL Highlights of Illinois program are the relationship with the
Junior college and the extensive requirements and content of its
training program.

A: IN - I have had several District representatives relate that they
have had several \"Older folks\" who thought they new what was required
and then failed the written and proficiency testing. They have gone back
and re-learned the procedures which has raised the bar on field
knowledge. Their participation has brought several items to the table
that both the DOT and myself were not aware of and as such have
incorporated them our program. I believe as well as the DOT believes
that participation in a group like this opens up the communication lines
that all benefits from.

A: IN Also, the programs that we have created and/or revised based on
the regulation are now common topics of discussion with both
construction and testing personnel. Before the program, they were not
talking much.

A: KY Stimulated needed training. Improved communication.

A: MD-- Mid-Atlantic States are working on developing a certification
program for pavement marking. In fact, the draft manual will be ready
soon. Currently Maryland and Virginia are participating in this program
and will require qualification in this area. Other states are
participating in the development of the pavement markings program and
will require when ready. We believe that MARTCP\'s Pavement Marking
program has a potential to become a national program or will be accepted
by other regional programs and states. All participating states are
benefiting through the regional efforts. Efficiency/benefits that we
think we are enjoying and/or will result are: 1) Increased knowledge
through sharing of best practices and problems 2) Replacement of
individual states Standard Test Methods with standardized regional test
methods. Our Soils and Aggregate group has developed two regional test
methods that will be submitted to AASHTO. 3) Shared cost in the
development and printing of manuals. 4) Reciprocity among member
states - a huge benefit to contractors working in several states. Many
more..

A: ME - NETTCP has gone beyond the narrow scope of the reg and has
developed, and implemented to some degree, inspector certification as
well.

A: MI - IN MICHIGAN THE CONTRACTORS ARE INVOLVED IN QC/QA TESTING AND
HENCE HAVE BEEN DIRECTLY INVOLVED IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROGRAMS.
ALTHOUGH NO DIRECT COORDIANTION, MICHIGAN HAS ATTENDED MANY OF THE
REGIONAL CONFERENCES TO GATHER INFORMATION TO USE IN DEVELOPING
MICHIGAN\'S PROGRAMS

A: MT Requirements were the stimulus that the State needed to bite the
bullet and take on the training deficit. Most within the DOT are
impressed with the solid base that is now being built.

A: NC Implementation of QC/QA programs along with the training
requirements for Contractor/Supplier Technician training that they
provide has provided a more consistent product.

A: ND - We are not aware of an special success stories. NDDOT met the
regulatory requirements by the prescribed date. The NDDOT did contact
several other States and groups and used ideas gained from those
contacts.

A: NE The biggest success story right now is that the State finally came
to grips with having to implement the program and did it.

A: NH - The training courses and examines have been good refresher
courses for older testing personnel and have provided a way to mentor
new people. I have seen inspectors confidence in both test procedures
and use of equipment increase. Contractors\' personnel who do QC testing
on QC/QA projects are also required to be certified which has increased
their ability to test, understanding of the reasons for testing and even
their willingness to reject materials, although this latter result is
mostly tied to the risk of reduced payment under QC/QA specifications.
NH and the other States formed the NETTCP program because none of the
States had the resources to formulate certification programs on their
own. I attended some of the early meetings and can recall the
discussions and decisions to share tasks in order to get the programs
established in a timely manner. I think there was more accountability
during the whole development process too, because one state did not want
to cause a delay to the others.

A: NM - Our success stories are evidenced in the pride which certified
technicians hold their certifications. We have had several reports of
incidents where certified techs felt they were being compromised by
others and were concerned that their certifications may be placed in
jeopardy. The TTCP lab is housed in the Associated Contractors building
in Albuquerque with equipment and Lab Manager provided by the State
Highway and Transportation Department. Classes are jointly taught by
NMSHTD/ACNM personnel with Department hired proctors and personnel
administering the final exams (written and hands on testing). The TTCP
Lab Manager and ACNM Lab Instructor jointly review both State and
contractor labs and testing personnel in the field on a random basis to
assure compliance with 23 CFR 637. This has brought about improvements
in both lab testing equipment and sampling & testing procedures on the
projects. Because of the above random checks of field sampling & testing
procedures, the TTCP Lab personnel are being asked by State District
Labs and contractor management to review projects where differences
arise between State and contractor project testing personnel. The main
reason is to take advantage of some of their inspector training modules
outside those of soils, aggregates, HMA, Profilograph, and Nuclear
Densometer. Prior to developing New Mexico\'s TTCP, the State visited
Colorado and Texas to look at their programs. Being impressed by both
programs, the State in cooperation with the ACNM, developed their
program taking much from both Colorado and Texas. Through WAQTC, New
Mexico envisions allowing reciprocity with other members of the
Alliance, but will insist on materials technicians undergoing training
and certification in order to attach a New Mexico Rider to their WAQTC
Certification for selected AASHTO tests where modified to meet New
Mexico\'s procedures. For example: several AASHTO tests allow different
methods, such as Method A, B, or C. New Mexico wants to be sure
technicians are competent in the methods being used in New Mexico.

A: NV - The success story should be in place about a year from now, when
NAQTC is in effect (and most of NDOT\'s inspectors are covered). The
NAQTC came out of the NvQI effort - all the agencies agreed to take on
tester certification as their first task. We gave NDOT an extension
until the end of 2003, since they do not have the budget resources to
get all their inspectors tested right away.

A: OK- We have none to offer. Oklahoma does not belong to a regional
certification group. However, they do coordinate activities with the
Western group.

A: OR Success is that after three years of private sector providing they
are finally providing the training needed in most areas.

A: RI The NETTCP is a model organization that has developed an effective
qualification program. The Board Members (made up of State, Federal and
Industry reps) continue to explore other construction areas and develop
new qualification programs in an effort to improve the quality of our
constructed highway facilities. NETTCP is currently assisting in the
development of a National Geotechnical Inspector Qualification Program.

A: SC- We have a very good certification program for asphalt inspectors;
the only area where we currently utilize QC/QA and include contractor
test results in the acceptance process.

A: SD - The Department's Training Office was eliminated during a
government downsizing effort. In the following years many of the
Departments experienced staff retired and the training opportunities for
new employees were limited. Through the implementation of Technician
Certification programs the Department was able to dedicate the time.
Many of the Department's training courses had been held for years and it
just needed to be updated. Members of the working groups that developed
the Department's program attended several of the Technician
Certification Workshops that were held in the old Region 5 & 7 States.
We also reviewed copies of the policies and training course materials
from several of the regional groups.

A: TN- No. Our teaching the soils subjects allowed TDOT to promote some.

A: TX - The following requirements are contained in the TxDOT QA
program:

> A. Any individual who performs tests on materials for acceptance must
> be qualified.

B. To qualify, an individual must pass a written test (minimum score of
80%) and must satisfactorily perform the test in the presence of an
authorized evaluator. Certifications from the Texas Hot Mix Asphalt
Pavement Association or the American Concrete Association may be used to
satisfy the written exam and observation part of the qualification
requirement.

> C. Qualified individuals must participate in split/proficiency samples
> to validate their qualification. Participation in the
> split/proficiency sampling is required at 12 months and 24 months
> after initial qualification. Qualification (written test and observed
> performance) of test procedure is again required after 36 months.

A: UT RESPONSE: There is more uniformity and consistency in the
application of a region wide program. A certain level of confidence and
trust is developed in a region wide program. The reciprocity element is
a real plus.

A: VA- We not only have been able to be a part of the Mid Atlantic
Region, but now we are part of the Southeastern Region and have been
able to apply lessons learned there from the Mid Atlantic Region. F. As
a result of updating our Hydraulic Cement Concrete Course to coincide
with the regional program we are beginning to work with the Concrete
Pre-cast Industry to develop a training course specifically geared to
their technicians. Cooperation in standardization of specifications for
training purposes. States have rewritten some of their specifications
because of what they have seen other states doing. We have developed
generic manuals for the regional states to use rather than each state
developing their own. All states in the region have been able to improve
their own programs by having the opportunity to see what other states
have been doing.

A:WA- One success story at WSDOT is that in one region the Independent
Assurance Inspector is developing a short mentoring project, almost like
OJT, for new employees. This region feels that the testing is better
than it was 5 years ago. There is no excessive deviation of the split
sample with the acceptance sample.

**[Question #5 -]{.underline}** Do you recommend any areas of
improvement for the technician certification programs in general? Topics
for our national group to maybe focus on?

A: CT- Possible assistance in the NETTCP Quality Assurance Technologist
Course (Greg Doyle will have greater details).

A: DC NOT AT THIS TIME

A: FL- Process control and quality control 101 - QA/QC specifications
development - Basic statistics made easy, simple and done with software
programs

A: HI - It appears that all the training modules that have been
developed have been on the materials side and the State would like to
see training modules developed for the construction side.

A: IA- Construction inspection is an area that could continue to use
improvement.

A: IN- This screams for a National task force made up of DOT and Feds.

A: KY If W.O. or R.C.'s plan to make reviews for compliance, then
guidance should be provided for minimum requirements.

A: LA There needs to be emphasis on the integration of test results with
the entire construction process. The initial focus of meting 23 CFR
requirements has been on sampling and testing. The results of materials
sampling and testing is to determine the acceptability of the product,
which is the construction project. Focus needs to be directed toward the
construction process, visual inspection, development and enforcement of
specifications, and the application of test results to the construction
process. There needs to be focus on appropriate training to support
qualification testing, with training for the trainers. There was
supposed to be a group to develop technician training and qualification
for subsurface exploration under the M-TRAC program. This material
should be developed.

A: MD- There is a need for establishing centers for performance testing
in areas of soils and aggregates, HMA and may be for concrete. States
are short staffed and qualification programs have increased work load
for them. A concept of regional centers for performance testing would
help a great deal

A: MI - THERE IS A NEED TO DEVELOP PROCEDURES TO QUALIFY PEOPLE WHO WILL
ONLY BE USED TEMPORARILY (IN CONTRAST TO PERSONS WHO ARE TESTERS BY
PROFESSION) FOR EXAMPLE SUMMER TEMPS AND CO-OPS.

A: MT Support (as in funding) for Division involvement in Regional
groups to continue the momentum with State counterparts. Despite State
claims of compliance with requirements intent is a far cry from reality.
Most still have a long way to go and without continued encouragement
things can fall by the wayside.

A: NC Better information (and Study Guides) provided prior to attendance
to training is important. Technicians who have read the material prior
to class typically have a higher passing rate.

A: ND - More uniform interpretation of the regulation and more uniform
compliance from State to State would be of benefit.

A: NE Need to keep pushing the benefits of statistical analysis of QC
and QA test results.

A: NH - Several certification programs seem to be moving from areas of
materials testing to areas of inspection, such as foundations, steel
fabrication, etc. While I do not object to training inspectors in these
areas, I think we have to be careful to maintain the distinction between
the requirements of 23 CFR 637 and construction inspection issues.

A: NM- An issue which has become a major concern in New Mexico is the
increasing use of Construction Management firms and their tendency to
hire an individual to perform one function: i.e, sampling or running
single gradations. The TTCP Board consisting of two NMSHTD managers and
two contractors, with an FHWA advisory member, has been insisting that
anyone sampling or testing for acceptance go through the entire training
and be in OJT status prior to sampling or testing for acceptance. The CM
firms (and testing firms) believe this to be unreasonable. This became a
particular problem with HMA core sampling where individuals were hired
locally for a rural project to take cores. The TTCP Board insisted that
the individuals be trained in HMA, but to do that, they also had to be
trained in soils, and then aggregates, since they were a pre-requisite
to the HMA training. The TTCP Board will be discussing this issue in the
very near future and how to address it. They certainly do not want to
compromise their excellent program. New Mexico\'s TTCP Program was
developed around NMSHTD needs in developing multi-task oriented NMSHTD
Materials Technicians and not for Consultant Management firms or private
testing firms where employees are oriented towards a single task. This
is, of course, only a problem where contractor testing is used for
acceptance through the validation/verification process.

A: OR A technician certification programs need to emphasize the
certified over qualified.

A: PR You do not want to prescribe a procedure, but I think we could
benefit from a little bit more guidance and sharing of information. This
survey could assist with that. In our case, I would like to see detailed
information on what states with individual programs are doing.

A: RI Development of a national database of Qualified Technicians.
Requirement for qualification of construction inspectors. Continue to
foster the relationships between the regional certification groups.

A: SD - Process for handling seasonal and temporary employees. The
Department is now considering developing their own certification course
for sampling and testing fresh concrete.

A: TX We do not have recommendations for the technician qualification
program at this time.

A: VA- A. Insistence on performance checks for technicians. B. When
states or regions develop courses that they think globally rather than
locally and develop generic courseware.

A: VT Good interaction with the Regional Certification Organization is
important to maintain.

A: WA- WSDOT is very interested in how FHWA is going to interpret this
regulation. Is FHWA going to be happy with a once per year certification
or will we be doing an audit, to make sure each person is qualified?
What about the equipment used? Does this have to be tracked along with
the people who are qualified? Should the equipment be calibrated to
AASHTO standards or the more stringent manufacturer\'s specs. How to get
local agencies trained, if they are short on money for training?

**[Question \# 6 -]{.underline}** Are you aware of any states using
reciprocity as of yet? Between which states? Approximately how many
personnel in number?

A: CA - No. This state DOT disagrees in principle with reciprocity

A: CT - A major selling point of the NETTCP program is reciprocity
between the New England States.

A: DC MID-ATLANTIC REGION STATES

A: HI - As far as Hawaii is concerned, any certified technician from the
WAQTC training program has reciprocity with HDOT.

A: IA - Yes. Iowa currently has reciprocity with Missouri, Nebraska, and
Kansas in ACC. Approximately 20 people are affected.

A: IN- Yes, I am as well as my DOT is aware of several states using
reciprocity. We have not had but only a few requests over the last
decade wanting reciprocity. The DOT position on regional reciprocity is
that it is not valid, What is needed is AASHTO and/or the FHWA step
forward and address the issues on a national basis, rather that one,
two, or four states together. Piece-mealing has never worked, at it is
not working now.

A: LA We have only be asked to reciprocate by one person. LA DOTD will
recognize certification from another state highway department as
equivalent to the required six months experience and allow the applicant
to begin certification testing. Applicants holding equivalent
certifications from the transportation department of another state may
elect to take the certification exam one time without completing
prerequisite courses. If the applicant passes the written exam, the
applicant may continue the certification process. Credit will be given
for prerequisite courses at the minimum passing score. If the applicant
does not pass the written exam on the first attempt, the applicant will
be required to successfully complete all prerequisites prior to a second
attempt at the exam. Standard waiting periods and attempt limits will
apply.

A: MD -- Maryland to date we have accepted 149 certifications under our
verbal reciprocity agreement. All of these technicians were previously
certified in VA and WVA. We will have a formal agreement signed shortly.

A: ME - All New England states have reciprocity. Ongoing effort
(currently stalled for awhile) to involve NY with broader reciprocity
than the current agreement.

A: MT Don't know. WAQTC has discussed.

A: NC In the Southeast they are not yet. They intend on sharing
information on all their programs that will assist in giving credit for
portions of certifications from other states that are duplicated in the
receiving state.

A: ND - NDDOT will accept all state certified technician and equipment
qualifications. NDDOT regularly accepts personnel and equipment from
neighboring states such as South Dakota and Minnesota.

A: NH - One of the goals of developing the NETTCP was to provide
reciprocity between the States, especially for contractors who tend to
work in more than one of the small NE states. I am sure it is working
for the contractors, although I have not heard specifically. I am not
aware of NH using other States inspectors for testing materials produced
in another State. We hire a consultant, for instance, to test pre-cast
products produced in Vermont

A: NJ- I am not aware of any states using reciprocity as of yet but this
is one of the primary goals of MARTCP.

A: NM - Through WAQTC, New Mexico envisions allowing reciprocity with
other members of the Alliance, but will insist on materials technicians
undergoing training and certification in order to attach a New Mexico
Rider to their WAQTC Certification for selected AASHTO tests where
modified to meet New Mexico\'s procedures. For example: several AASHTO
tests allow different methods, such as Method A, B, or C. New Mexico
wants to be sure technicians are competent in the methods being used in
New Mexico.

A: NV - Reciprocity is underway, but the program deadline is January
2002. Technicians are taking the classes and test, with more expected as
the deadline approaches.

A: RI Yes, The New England States are looking to expand to include
others such as New York.

A: SC- Not aware of any at present. SCDOT has discussed this and is
hesitant to incorporate reciprocity, due to differences in specs and
test procedures with nearby states.

A: SD - The SDDOT does accept the certifications from North Dakota and
Minnesota in several of their asphalt certifications areas. Less than 25
people have used the reciprocity agreement.

A: TN- None in our border states, that we know of.

A: TX - We are not aware of TxDOT using reciprocity thus far. TxDOT has
indicated reciprocity may be granted to individuals who have been
successfully qualified another state\'s program. These will be
considered on a case-by-case basis and must meet the approval of the
TxDOT Construction Division Director.

A: UT In concept, the personnel qualified under the WAQTC program are
qualified to perform sampling and testing activities in any of the WAQTC
member states. To date, I\'m not aware that UDOT or any other member
states have exercised the reciprocity element of the WAQTC program.

A: VA - Maryland and Virginia are presently accepting each other\'s
certified personnel. We, in Virginia just started accepting Maryland\'s
program and have about a dozen applications pending for approval.

A: WA- If a person comes into this state and takes a job with WSDOT and
will be a tester, WSDOT is still going to make sure they are qualified
in the way WSDOT does that test. We have a design/build project just
starting. The testers are to be certified by WSDOT as qualified, even if
they are certified by WAQTC. Furthermore, any non WSDOT person still has
to know the protocols and the chain of command even if they are WAQTC
certified.

A: WY WYOMING‑reciprocity has been discussed, specifically to coordinate
with the WAQTC; the issue of certification and therefore, reciprocity,
are both directed to a certified technician's understanding of related
State specifications and pay factors rather than limited to their
ability to perform a standard or Wyoming modified test. At this time,
contractors working in Wyoming must be certified in Wyoming consistent
with the approved QCQA program.

**[Question \# 7 -]{.underline}** Please send us the name, phone number
and email address for your State Transportation Agency counterpart in
charge of their certification programs. We have only been communicating
with the regional groups to date and would like to keep the rest of the
states in the loop.

A: AK Alaska Materials Engineer, Tom Moses at 907-269-6234, Kimbern
Turley, FHWA

A: CA - Daniel Zuhlke (916-227-7907) <Daniel_Zuhlke@dot.ca.gov>, Steve
Healow, FHWA

A: CO - Tim Aschenbrener, Colorado Depatrment of Transportation,
Materials and Geotechnical Section Manager,
tim.aschenbrener@state.dot.co.us or \@dot.state.co.us, Bernie Kuta, FHWA

A: CT - Mr. Keith Lane, 860-258-0371, email: keith.lane@po.state.ct.us ,
Stephen J. Cooper, FHWA

A: DC MR. WOODROW HOOD, MARYLAND SHA - MID-ATLANTIC STATES
[WHOOD@SHA.STATE.MD.US]{.underline} , Wasi Kahn, DC Government

A: FL - <Douglas.townes@dot.state.fl.us>, Greg Schiess, FHWA

A: HI - Garret Okada at 808-832.3553 at <Garret_Okada@exec.state.hi.us>
, Steven Fong, FHWA

A: IA - Certification Program Administrator, Chirs Anderson,
(515)239-1819. <christie.anderson@idot.state.ia.us>, Franklin Howell,
FHWA

A: ID GARTH NEWMAN, 208-334-8039, <GNEWMAN@ITD.STATE.ID.US>; Ed Johnson,
FHWA

A: IL IDOT Materials Engineer: Eric Harm 217 782-7200;
[Harmee@nt.dot.state.il.us]{.underline} ; Hal Wakefield, FHWA

A: IN- Ron Walker, Quality Assurance Engineer, Indiana DOT, 317-232-5280
X 202, <rwalker@indot.state.in.us> , Victor Gallivan, FHWA

A: KY James D. Stone, Materials Director 502 564-3160,

> <jstone@mail.kytc.state.ky.us>; John "Dudley" Brown, FHWA

A: LA Dedra Jones, Training Manager ph. 225-767-9130
[djones@dotd.state.la.us]{.underline} Philip Arena, FHWA

A: MD -- MR. WOODROW HOOD, MARYLAND SHA - email- WHOOD@SHA.STATE.MD.US ,
Jitesh Parikh, FHWA

A: ME- Bruce Yeaton, MDOT Testing Engineer (and current NETTCP
President). 202-287-2227, Michael F. Praul, FHWA

A: MI- HOT- MIX: MIKE FRANKHOUSE 517-322-5672 MIDOT:frankhousem@mdot.mt,
-PCC: JOHN LAVOY 517-322-5698 MIDOT:lavoyj@mdot.mt - AGGREGATES: AL
ROBORDS 517-322-1357, MIDot:robordsa@MDOT.MT, - DENSITY: PAT O\'ROURKE
517-322-1633 MIDOT:orourkep@mdot.mt , Ryan Rizzo, FHWA

A: MN - Mark Gieseke,, Minnesota State DOT, MS 645, Engineering
Services, 1400 Gervais Avenue, Maplewood, MN 55109, (651) 779 5533,
William Lohr, FHWA

A: MT Tom Roberts, Montana Department of Transportation, 406‑444‑6035,
<troberts@state.mt.us>; Mark Zitzka, FHWA

A: NC Jack E. Cowsert, 919-733-7088,
[jcowsert@dot.state.nc.us]{.underline} ; Jim Phillips, FHWA

A: ND - Ron Horner, Materials and Research Engineer, 701-328-6904,
<rhorner@state.nd.us>, Ronny Hartl, FHWA

A: NE Mostafa \"Moe\" Jamshidi 402-479-4750, <mjamshid@dor.state.ne.us>,
Frank M. Rich, FHWA

A: NH - Alan Rawson, (603) 271-3151 <Arawson@dot.state.nh.us>, David
Hall, FHWA

A: NJ- Mrs. Eileen Connolly, Chief, Bureau of Materials 609-530-2307
e-mail <tpjconn@dot.state.nj.us>, Hadi Pezeshki, FHWA

A: NM - The Chairman of the TTCP Board is: John Tenison, State Materials
Engineer, NMSHTD, Phone: (505) 827-9811, E-mail:
john.tenison@nmshtd.state.nm.us, Jack Petring, FHWA

A: NV - The NDOT contact is Jeff Hale, (775) 888 7226.
<jhale@dot.state.nv.us>, Greg Novak, FHWA

A: OK- ODOT\'s contact person is, -Mr. Steve Sawyer, 405-632-8022
[s.sawyer@odot.org]{.underline} , Lubin Quinones, FHWA

A: OR Jeff Gower, 503-986-3123,
<Jeffrey.L.GOWER@odot.state.or.us>[;]{.underline} Anthony Boesen, FHWA

A: PR PRHTA\'s Materials Office Mr. Orlando Diaz Quirindongo
(787)729-1592; [OQuirindongo@act.dtop.gov.pr]{.underline} . Jose Torres,
FHWA (787)766-5600 X-234

A: RI Mark Felag, RIDOT State Materials Engineer, 401-222-2524 (x4130),
<mfelag@dot.state.ri.us>[;]{.underline} Peter Osborn, FHWA

A: SC - Milt Fletcher, SCDOT Research and Materials Engineer,
803-737-6681, FletcherMO@dot.state.sc.us., David Law, FHWA

A: SD - John Jund , Certification Engineer, (605) 773-3404,
<John.Jund@state.sd.us> , Bret Hestdalen, FHWA

A: TN- Brian Egan TDOT Materials and Test Division 615-350-4104, Harris
Deere, FHWA

A: TX - David Belser, TxDOT Engineer, (512) 465-7740
<dbelser@dot.state.tx.us>. , Jim Cravens, FHWA

A: UT Peter Tang, Quality Assurance Engineer, 801-965-4035
<PTANG@DOT.STATE.UT.US> [;]{.underline}Richard Laubsch, FHWA

A: VA - James D. Lipinski (Dan), 804-328-3150,
<Lipinski_jd@vdot.state.va.us>, Vincent Barone, FHWA

A: VT Bob Cauley, VAOT,
[**Bob.Cauley@state.vt.us**](mailto:Bob.Cauley@state.vt.us) , Mark
Richter, FHWA

A: WA- Bob Briggs, WSDOT, (360) 709-5411.
[briggbo@wsdot.wa.gov]{.underline} Sender: Cathy Nicholas, FHWA

A: WY Rick Harvey, WY Materials Engineer, 307‑777‑4070

<rharvey1@state.dot.wy.us>; Galen Hesterberg, FHWA

Thanks

John A. Perry, C&M Engineer, Washington DC

Office of Infrastructure / Asset Management

ph 202-366-2023