# Presentation: 753057

## REGIONAL CERTIFICATION EFFORTS

- By  Chris Anderson
- Technical Training & Certification  Program Coordinator

## ORIGIN

- Began in 1994
- Regions 5 & 7
- National Effort
- New England States
- Northwestern States

**Notes:**
The effort of regional certification began in 1994 with a meeting  of Region 5 states and a few Region 7 states.  The next year the meeting included all of 
region 5 & 7 states and visitors from the New England states that were looking at regional certification in the Northeast.  It didn’t take long for other parts of the country to hear what was going on in the Midwest and regional certification was also being looked at in the Northwest.  The Midwestern states had some of the most advanced training and certification programs in the country which was actually a hindrance.  The states that were starting with nothing were able to agree on a common program where the more established states didn’t want to give up their programs.

## COMMON TEST METHODS

- AASHTO or ASTM (PCC)
- Superpave in ACC
- ACI in PCC

**Notes:**
The largest stumbling block toward regional certification was everyone agreeing on common test methods.  Everyone had their own way of doing things and it didn’t look too promising to get everyone to change.  The invention of superpave helped this effort greatly.  When states went to superpave mixes they were using AASHTO Standards which meant the use of common test methods.  With so many states using ACI (American Concrete Institute) certification for their Level I PCC certification., this meant using the same ASTM standards.  It was actually looking possible for regional certification.  Slow but sure states, such as Iowa, are agreeing to use AASHTO standards for their testing.

## TEST METHODS

- Which methods in what levels
- Completed in Kansas City in 1997
- Task Groups formed to develop materials
- Soils, Aggregate, ACC
- PCC put on hold

**Notes:**
Once states started agreeing on using common testing methods, the next challenge was to sort out what methods should be taught and in what levels of certification they should be in.  At the Annual Regional Meeting in Kansas City last year this was decided by the representatives present.  After that meeting task groups were formed to develop materials in soils, aggregate, and ACC.  Since funding was limited and ACI was being used by many states, it was decided a PCC task group was not needed at that time.  These materials should be available by the 1999 training season.

## AGREEMENTS 

- Region 7 states agree to reciprocity in ACC
- Hot Mix Asphalt AC Technician
- Hot Mix Laboratory Technician
- Regions 5 & 7 reciprocity in PCC Level I
- ACI
- States similar programs

## AGREEMENTS - CONT.

- Level III PCC Mix Design
- Development by Dr. Ken Hover
- Allow reciprocity
- Aggregate
- Development of Materials
- Soils

**Notes:**
Iowa initiated the development of a Level III PCC Mix Design course.  We approached the FHWA about funding this and this has been approved.  Dr. Ken Hover of Cornell University has been contracted to write the course.  This course will hopefully be accepted and used by many of the states which should allow reciprocity in Level III PCC.

One of the task groups that was formed from the Kansas City meeting has been working on training manuals for aggregate.  These are being developed around the test methods that were decided upon in KC.  This should allow states to have reciprocity in aggregate in the near future.

A task group is also working on a soils manual, but we have not talked reciprocity with other states concerning soils at this time since Iowa does all it’s own soils testing.

## WHAT’S NEXT?

- UPPER LEVELS
- Specifications
- Documentation
- Construction

**Notes:**
To work on the upper levels of certification with other states we need to look at the states specifications and documentation.  To attain agreement in these areas will be a challenge but not impossible.  The use of Site Manager could help with this.

The FHWA is considering using the task groups that were previously developed for use in developing materials for construction inspection.

## CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

- Part 637
- All sampling and testing data to be used in the acceptance decision or the independent assurance program will be executed by qualified sampling and testing personnel by June 29,2000
- Qualified/Certified

**Notes:**
As Regional Certification was being discussed a Code of Federal Regulations was developed which hurried things along.  The code reads--
This prompted the development of some task groups to work on documents that would help states that had not yet developed a program to be able to meet the code.

## NATIONAL EFFORTS

- Task Groups Formed
- Technical Training and Certification/Qualification - Library of Materials
- Guidelines for Establishing a Technician Training & Certification Program
- Training Manuals - Soils, Aggregate, ACC

**Notes:**
Some of the National FHWA task groups that I was a part of to assist in this effort were:

## PROGRAM ELEMENTS - FHWA 

- Formal Training of Personnel
- Hands-on Training
- On-the-job Training of State DOT Procedures
- Written and Performance Exams

**Notes:**
The FHWA has developed a list of program elements that they feel states should  use as a basis for their programs.  

## PROGRAM ELEMENTS - CONT.

- Requalification/Recertification Every 2-3 YearsDequalification/Decertification ProcessAutomatically Qualifying/Certifying Engineers or Grandfathering Anyone is _Not Acceptable__ _

## CONTINUING EFFORTS

- Task Groups Active
- FHWA Involvement if Possible
- Explore New Areas Where Reciprocity is Possible

**Notes:**
We are still working hard as a state, regionally and nationally toward reciprocity.  In order to continue we are going to have to keep the task groups active and working,.  We also need the involvement of the FHWA, since we could not have made it this far without their involvement and funding.  We need to continue to look at new areas where reciprocity may be possible.