Historically, many highway agency managers and administrators 

have tended to view their highway systems as simply a collection 

of projects. By viewing the network in this manner, there is a 

certain comfort derived from the ability to match pavement actions 

with their physical/functional needs. However, by only focusing 

on projects, opportunities for strategically managing entire road 

networks and asset needs are overlooked. Although the “bottom up” 

approach is analytically possible, managing networks this way can be 

a daunting prospect. Instead, road agency administrators have tackled 

the network problem from the “top down” by allocating budgets 

and resources based on historic estimates of need. Implicit in this 

approach is a belief that the allocated resources will be wisely used 

and will prove adequate to achieve desirable network service levels.

By using a quick checkup tool, road agency managers and 

administrators can assess the needs of their network and other 

highway assets and determine the adequacy of their resource 

allocation effort. A quick checkup is readily available and can be 

usefully applied with minimum calculations.

It is essential to know whether present and planned program 

actions (reconstruction, rehabilitation, and preservation) will produce 

a net improvement in the condition of the network. However, before 

the effects of any planned actions to the highway network can be 

analyzed, some basic concepts should be considered.

A Quick Check of Your

Highway Network Health

+

8

“Remaining Service Life”(RSL) is the tool we need to apply. 

RSL generally uses data already being collected though the 

agency’s pavement management system (PMS). Construction 

and rehabilitation costs and performance can generally be pulled 

from existing databases. Maintenance and preservation data can be 

estimated until the agency gains actual experience with preservation 

treatments and integrates maintenance and preservation costs into 

their PMS. by Larry Galehouse, Director, 

National Center for Pavement Preservation

 and

Jim Sorenson, Team Leader,

FHWA Office of Asset Management

For more information, please contact the National Center for 

Pavement Preservation.

www.pavementpreservation.org

(517) 432-8220

If you would like to view the electronic version of this exercise along 

with the worksheet, please visit the FHWA System Preservation Web 

site at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/preservation/library.cfm.

Publication No. FHWA-IF-07-006
Assume that every lane-mile segment of road in the network was 

rated by the number of years remaining until the end of life (terminal 

condition). Remember that terminal condition does not mean a failed 

road; rather, it is the level of deterioration that management has set 

as a minimum operating condition for that road or network. Consider 

the rated result of the current network condition, shown in Figure 1.

If no improvements are made for 1 year, then the number of 

years remaining until the end of life will decrease by 1 year for each 

road segment, except for those stacked at zero. The zero stack will 

increase significantly because it maintains its previous balance and 

also becomes the recipient of those roads having previously been 

stacked with 1 year remaining. Thus, the entire network will age 1 

year to the condition shown in Figure 2, with the net lane-miles in 

the zero stack raised from 4% to 8% of the network.

Some highway agencies still subscribe to the old practice 

of assigning their highest priorities to the reconstruction or 

rehabilitation of the worst roads. This practice of “worst first,” that is, 

continually addressing only those roads in the zero stack, is a proven 

death spiral strategy because reconstruction and rehabilitation are the 

most expensive ways to maintain or restore serviceability. Rarely does 

sufficient funding exist to sustain such a strategy.

The measurable loss of pavement life can be thought of as the 

network’s total lane-miles multiplied by 1 year, that is, lane-milemile-years added to the network. A palette of pavement preservation 

treatments, or mix of fixes, is available to address the network needs 

at a much lower cost than traditional methods.

Preservation treatments are only suitable if the right treatment 

is used on the right road at the right time. In Figure 9, the added 

treatments used include concrete joint resealing, thin hot-mix asphalt 

(HMA) overlay (≤1.5 in.), microsurfacing, chip seal, and crack seal. 

By knowing the cost per lane-mile and the treatment life extension, 

it is possible to create a new strategy (costing $36,781,144) that 

satisfies the network need. In this example, the agency saved in 

excess of $500,000 from traditional methods (costing $37,323,132) 

while erasing the 1,654 lane-mile-year deficit produced by the initial 

program tally.

2 7

Figure 1. Current condition.

Network Strategy

Programmed Activity Lane - Mile - Years Total Cost

Reconstruction

 (31 lane-miles) 820 $15,200,340 

Rehabilitation 

 (77 lane-miles) 1,125 $14,545,002 

Pavement Preservation 

Concrete Resealing 

Thin HMA Overlay 

Microsurfacing 

Chip Seal

Crack Seal 

(84 lane-miles)

(4 yrs x 31 lane-miles)

 (10 yrs x 16 lane-miles)

 (7 yrs x 44 lane-miles)

(5 yrs x 79 lane-miles)

(2 yrs x 506 lane-miles)

 

 412

 124

 160

 308

 395

1,012

 $1,475,850

 $ 979,600

 $ 870,560

 $1,309,000

$1,104,420

$1,296,372

4,356 $36,781,144

Figure 9. New program tally.

In a real-world situation, the highway agency would program 

its budget to achieve the greatest impact on its network condition. 

Funds allocated for reconstruction and rehabilitation projects must 

be viewed as investments in the infrastructure. Conversely, funds 

directed for preservation projects must be regarded as protecting 

and preserving past infrastructure investments. Integrating 

reconstruction, rehabilitation, and preservation in the proper 

proportions will substantially improve network conditions for the 

taxpayer while safeguarding the highway investment.
knowing the only two components for reconstruction and 

rehabilitation projects: lane miles and design life of each project fix. 

Figure 4 shows the agency’s programmed activities for reconstruction, 

and Figure 5 displays it for rehabilitation.

To satisfy the needs of its highway network, the agency must 

accomplish 4,356 lane-mile-years of work per year. The agency’s 

program will derive 1,090 lane-mile-years from reconstruction, 1,200 

lane-mile-years from rehabilitation, and 412 lane-mile-years from 

pavement preservation for a total of 2,702 lane-mile-years. Thus, 

these programmed activities fall short of the minimum required to 

maintain the status quo and hence would contribute to a net loss in 

network pavement condition of 1,654 lane-mile-years. The agency’s 

programmed tally is shown in Figure 7.

4 5

Project Design

Life

LaneMiles Lane-MileYears Lane-Mile 

Cost Total Cost

No. 1 25 yrs 22 550 $463,425 $10,195,350 

No. 2 30 yrs 18 540 $556,110 $10,009,980 

Total = 1,090 $20,205,330 

Projects This Year = 2

Figure 4. Reconstruction evaluation.

Reconstruction Evaluation

Figure 5. Rehabilitation evaluation.

Rehabilitation Evaluation

Projects This Year = 3

Project Design

Life

LaneMiles Lane-MileYears Lane-Mile 

Cost Total Cost

No. 10 18 yrs 22 396 $263,268 $5,791,896 

No. 11 15 yrs 28 420 $219,390 $6,142,920 

No. 12 12 yrs 32 384 $115,848 $3,707,136 

Total = 1,200 $15,641,952

Figure 6. Preservation evaluation.

Figure 7. Programmed tally.

Projects This Year = 5 

Project Life 

Extension 

Lane - 

Miles 

Lane - Mile - 

Years 

Lane - Mile 

Cost Total Cost

No. 

101 2 yrs 12 24 $2,562 $30,744 

No. 

102 3 yrs 22 66 $7,743 $170,346 

No. 

103 5 yrs 26 130 $13,980 $363,480 

No. 

104 7 yrs 16 112 $29,750 $476,000 

No. 

105 10 yrs 8 80 $54,410 $435,280 

Total = 412 $1,475,850

Network Trend 

Programmed Ac tivity Lane - Mile - Years Total Cost

Reconstruction 1,090 $20,205,330 

Rehabilitation 1,200 $15,641,952 

Preservation 412 $1,475,850

Total 2,702 $37,323,132

Network Needs (Loss) ( — ) 4,356 

 Deficit = — 1,654 

When evaluating pavement preservations treatments in this 

analysis, it is appropriate to think in terms of “extended life” rather 

than design life. The term design life, as used in the reconstruction 

and rehabilitation tables, relates better to the new pavement’s 

structural adequacy to handle repetitive loadings and environmental 

factors. This is not the goal of pavement preservation. Each type 

of treatment/repair has unique benefits that should be targeted to 

the specific mode of pavement deterioration. This means that life 

extension depends on factors such as type and severity of distress, 

traffic volume, environment, and so forth. Figure 6 exhibits the 

agency’s programmed activities for preservation.
To offset this amount of deterioration over the entire network, the 

agency would need to annually perform a quantity of work equal to 

the total number of lane-mile-years lost just to maintain the status 

quo. Performing a quantity of work that produces fewer than 4,356 

new lane-mile-years would lessen the natural decline of the overall 

network but still fall short of maintaining the status quo. However, if 

the agency produces more than 4,356 lane-mile-years, it will improve 

the network. 

In the following example, an agency can easily identify the effect 

of an annual program that consists of reconstruction, rehabilitation, 

and preservation projects on its network. This assessment involves 

This exercise can be performed for any pavement network to 

benchmark its current trend. By using this approach, it is possible to 

see how various long-term strategies could be devised and evaluated 

against a policy objective related to total-network condition.

Once the pavement network is benchmarked, an opportunity 

exists to correct any shortcomings in the programmed tally. A 

decision must first be made as to whether to improve the network 

condition or to just maintain the status quo. This is a management 

decision and system goal. Continuing with the previous example, a 

strategy will be proposed to prevent further network deterioration 

until additional funding is secured.

The first step is to modify the reconstruction and rehabilitation 

(R&R) programs. An agonizing decision must be made about which 

projects to defer, eliminate, or phase differently with multiyear 

activity. In Figure 8, deductions are made in the R&R programs to 

recover funds for less costly treatments in the pavement preservation 

program. The result of this decision recovered slightly over $6 

million.

Modifying the reconstruction and rehabilitation programs has 

reduced the number of lane-mile-years added to the network 

through reconstruction and rehabilitation from 2,702 to 2,357. 

However, using less costly treatments elsewhere in the network to 

address roads in better condition will increase the number of lane6 3

Agency Highway Network = 4,356 lane-miles

Each year the network will lose

4,356 lane-mile-years

Figure 3. Network lane-miles.

Program Modification 

Programmed Activity Lane - Mile - Years Cost Savings 

Reconstruction 31 lane-miles

 (40 lane miles)

820

(1,090) $5,004,990

Rehabilitation 77 lane-miles

 (82 lane- miles)

1,125

(1,200) $1,096,950

Pavement Preservation 

 (84 lane- miles) (412) 0

Total = 

2,357

 (2,702) $6,101,940

Figure 8. Revised R&R programs.

Figure 2. Condition 1 year later.

years. Consider the following quantitative illustration: Suppose your 

agency’s highway network consisted of 4,356 lane-miles. Figure 3 

shows that without intervention, it will lose 4,356 lane-mile-years 

per year.
Pavement Network Evaluation Worksheet

Total Network Lane Miles =

________________

Reconstruction

Project Design Life Lane Miles Lane Mile Years Lane Mile Cost Total Cost

× =× =× =

Total =

Rehabilitation

Project Design Life Lane Miles Lane Mile Years Lane Mile Cost Total Cost

× =× =× =× =

Total =

Pavement Preservation

Project Design Life Lane Miles Lane Mile Years Lane Mile Cost Total Cost

× =× =× =× =× =

Total =

Network Trend

Project Lane Mile Years Total Cost

ReconstructionRehabilitationPreservation

Total 

Summary

Programmed Activity =(Lane Mile Years)Total Network =(Lane Mile Years)Gain (+) / Deficit (-) =
A Quick 

Highway 

Network 

Evaluation 

Worksheet

A Removable Worksheet to 

Assess the Needs of the Highway 

Network and the Adequacy 

of Resource Allocations

If you would like to view the electronic 

version of this exercise along with the 

worksheet, please visit the FHWA System 

Preservation Web site at http://www.fhwa.

dot.gov/preservation/library.cfm.