In addition, investments are being made with Federal assistance in modernizing older
facilities. Even the relatively new systems, such as the Washington (DC) Metro system and
the Bay Area Rapid Transit system (BART), are approximately twenty years old. As these
systems age, they require increasingly large maintenance programs to maintain an
acceptable reliability and safety level. Federal aid targeting system modernization and
renewal has paid off in improved infrastructure conditions. For transit and commuter rail
infrastructure, the condition of power stations, systems, bridges and tunnels, and
maintenance improved between 1984 and 1995. In 1995, 73 percent of elevated structures
were judged to be fair to good condition, and 73 percent of track and 61 percent of stations
were in good to excellent condition.” A survey of urban bus maintenance facilities in 1995
found that 74 percent were in good or excellent condition, also a significant improvement
over previous assessments. However, all these structures will need continued investments
to sustain acceptable performance.

Railroads '°

The U.S. railroad industry has been transformed significantly since the enactment of the
Staggers Rail Act of 1980. The changes that have occurred in the railroad industry over the
past two decades (and continue still) have been as radical as any that have taken place
during the industry’s 175-year history. By gaining the flexibility to negotiate rates and
choose routes, the industry has been able to respond more effectively to market demands.
The outcome has been the emergence of a small number of larger, more profitable carriers
carrying more freight tonnage and passengers, as well as providing more freight-miles and
passenger-miles. This has been accomplished with fewer employees, terminals, track
miles, railcars, and locomotives. Revenues for Class I railroads in 1995 totaled $32.3
billion, and they carried a total of 1.7 billion ton miles of cargo. This is an increase 42
percent from 1980. Profitability was at an all-time high.

In 1995, the nation’s railroad infrastructure consisted of about 170,000 miles of track
owned and maintained by freight railroads and Amtrak. Figure 5 shows the locations of
major intermodal rail and maritime terminals having significant annual lift capacity or
container throughput. Activities at these terminals have major impacts on other surface
transport infrastructure connecting links.

The average tonnage hauled per train also has increased from 2,144 tons in 1980 to 2,849
tons in 1995. This trend has affected the need for track maintenance, for which industry
expenditures have been rising moderately over the past ten years. In 1995, Class I railroads
spent $3.3 billion on track maintenance, representing 12 percent of their total operating
expenditures.

°US. Department of Transportation, 1997 Condition and Performance, p. 38.
' Information on railroads is from National Transportation Statistics (NTS) 1997, U.S. Department of
Transportation, Bureau of Transportation Statistics, pp. 237-238; and TSAR 1997, pp. 4, 8.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 8


and address the full range of issues, including a complete characterization of costs and
benefits; workforce requirements; implementation guidance, procedures and training aids;
necessary preconditions; and special considerations.

With Congressional encouragement, the Department of Transportation and other Federal
agencies have responded by developing, supporting, or participating in numerous special
programs to facilitate the advancement of significant technology innovations, disseminate
results to the transportation community, and promote implementation by public and private
sector users. Many R&D and technology demonstration efforts have been undertaken in
partnership with state and local governments, industry trade associations and consortia,
professional organizations, and universities. Each of the programs highlighted below
focuses primarily on either operations or infrastructure; in general, each has as its principal
purpose either cooperative research and development or technology transfer. However, in
some cases, such as the Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) effort, a program may
include research and development as well as technology transfer and implementation
support.

Selected Programs

Priority Technologies Program (PTP)

The Priority Technology Program (PTP) is dedicated to supporting the demonstration,
testing, and evaluation of promising market-ready technological innovations to accelerate
their implementation. The program was created by the FHWA under ISTEA and was
funded at approximately $2 million annually through the end of FY 1997. The PTP
adopted a “lead State” concept, in which a State that was interested in benefiting from a
particular innovation agreed to a cost-sharing arrangement for demonstrating its potential
and for deploying and evaluating its performance in the field.

The Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP)

The Strategic Highway Research Program (SHRP) was designed to improve the safety,
durability, and performance of the Nation’s aging highways. The five-year, $150 million
research program initially was funded by Congress in 1987 from the Highway Trust Fund.
The SHRP research emphasized developing innovative technology products in four
program areas: asphalt, concrete and structures, pavement performance, and highway
operations. State and local transportation officials, members of academia, and industry
officials conducted the research. The SHRP was considered successful, producing a
number of new technology products and services during its first phase.

Among these “products” were the Superpave® asphalt materials mixture design and
analysis system, winter maintenance techniques combining roadway weather information
systems with snow and ice control strategies, and other “products” with direct applicability
to highway agency operations. Superpave enables the design, construction, and testing of

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 29


Box 2

Rapid Renewal after Natural Disasters

Industry has shown that with the proper incentives, techniques for rapid renewal can

be implemented and reconstruction of essential connections completed much faster than
is customary. The rapid restoration of damaged California freeways after the devastating
Northridge earthquake in 1995 illustrates that contractors can deliver extraordinary
performance in rapid reconstruction and renewal, saving users millionsof dollars in
avoided delays. The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) estimated that
the direct, transportation-related costs associated with travel disruption and delay on the
four freeway segments in the Los Angeles basin damaged by the earthquake exceeded
$1.6 million per day.

Using expedited contracting procedures invoked during the state of emergency, Caltrans
was able to restore all of the damaged freeway links within 10 months, including
repairing the severed Santa Monica Freeway in just 74 days.” The fast-track design, bid,
and approval process allowed the rebuilding projects to begin within 12 days of the
earthquake. The incentive program allowed early completion bonuses of up to $15
million for each segment. The contractor for the I-10 segment of the reconstruction
completed work 66 days early, earning a bonus of $200,000 per day. Using this
experience for subsequent projects, Caltrans avoided 16 days of traffic disruption by
accelerating the construction of a 540-foot-long bridge in 34 days. The contractor was
awarded $4.4 million for the new Highway 1 bridge at Carmel, and an additional
$320,000 as an incentive payment for early completion.””

The products of the Travel Model Improvement Program, notably the TRANSIMS and bi-
criteria assignment models, could contribute to an Asset Management system. These tools
are intended to estimate travel demands at various service levels and provide estimates of
accessibility and mobility. These types of tools would enable decision-makers to make
tradeoffs between different facility closure and detour scenarios, quantify the operational
impact on travelers, and estimate subsequent travel changes.

Properly applied, an Asset Management approach can enhance the performance and
maximize the useful life of physical infrastructure by careful allocation of scarce budgetary
resources to help meet growing traffic demands. Paving the way for widespread
implementation of Asset Management will require improved modeling and data base tools
and techniques, adapted and tailored to transportation applications. Asset inventory,
condition assessment, performance trend indicators, alternative benefit/cost analysis

* Caltrans News Release #95-012, March 22,1995.
27 Caltrans News Release #95-011, March 17, 1995; and Caltrans News Release #95-024, May 4, 1995.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 25


Technology Transfer and the Federal Laboratory Consortium

Technology transfer, as defined by one DOT administration, is “the process by which
knowledge, facilities, or capabilities developed by Federal laboratories or agencies are
transmitted to the private sector to expand the U.S. technology base and to maximize the
return on investment in Federally funded R&D.” >” The Stevenson-Wydler Act of 1980
(PL 96-480) mandates that each of the more than 600 Federal laboratories establish an
Office of Research and Technology Applications (ORTA) and set aside one-half of one
percent of their annual research and development (R&D) budget for “technology transfer”
purposes.

The Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 (PL 99-502) further amended this legislation
to add incentives for Federal laboratories to work cooperatively with universities and the
private sector for the transfer and commercialization of technologies, and formally
chartered the Federal Laboratory Consortium (FLC) to assist in this process. The FLC was
established in 1974 to act as a service organization for participating laboratories in
transferring technologies to the private sector and State and local government. This
legislation also enabled laboratories to enter into formal Cooperative Research and
Development Agreements (CRDAs or CRADAs) with private companies, educational
institutions, and other public agencies. Through these agreements, Federal laboratories can
share facilities, equipment, services, and personnel resources (although not appropriated
funds) with these non-Federal partners to develop an idea, prototype, or product for
introduction into the marketplace. The laboratories are authorized to assign patent rights
and license technologies to partners, and to retain royalties paid to them under such
arrangements. This authority to enter into CRADAs was extended to government-owned,
contractor-operated (GOCO) Federal laboratories by the National Competitiveness
Technology Transfer Act of 1989.

Partnerships for Technology Implementation

Each DOT modal administration has formed partnerships of varying sorts with its
constituents. Among the most relevant for infrastructure monitoring and renewal is the
FHWA support of the Highway Innovative Technology Evaluation Center (HITEC) and
ConMat programs centered at the Civil Engineering Research Foundation (CERF).

HITEC: Established by the FHWA in 1992 under a cooperative agreement with the CERF,
the HITEC facilitates the evaluation, demonstration and deployment of innovative
materials, products, services, systems and technologies for transportation infrastructure
applications. To speed up the process of innovation implementation, the HITEC convenes
an expert review and evaluation panel for each applicant. These panels are composed of
interested public, private, and academic stakeholders, including State and local highway
officials and highway users. In many cases, these users become ‘change agents’ themselves
and increase the probability that successful applications will be deployed.

3” 1993, Federal Aviation Administration Plan for Research, Engineering and Development, Washington,
DC: U.S. Dept. of Transportation, 1994, p. A-4.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 34


shipping schedules. Good performance from the Nation’s physical infrastructure is
equally important to transportation system users, general taxpayers, and the Government.
Moreover, the performance depends on segments of surface infrastructure that are
privately owned and maintained, such as railroad tracks, as well as those owned and
maintained by public entities, such as most roads and bridges.

Regardless of ownership, efficient, cost-effective tools and techniques are needed for
monitoring the condition of the infrastructure; for programming and carrying out timely,
efficient, cost-effective maintenance; and for rapid renewal. Yet, the methods, tools, and
materials used for the construction and maintenance of vehicles and transportation
infrastructure tend to change very slowly. This often is because infrastructure decision-
makers choose to minimize the initial investment or want to limit the risk of possible
unforeseen future consequences from using relatively untried technologies. Moreover,
because the U.S. infrastructure renewal markets generally are localized and limited,
industry is not motivated to perform advanced R&D. In this market context, low profit
margins must be anticipated for innovative products.

Recognizing these factors, an Infrastructure Renewal Subcommittee of the National Science
and Technology Council (NSTC) Interagency Coordinating Committee on Transportation
R&D was charged with developing a strategic R&D plan for transportation. The plan was
completed and published in 1997, and one of the goals outlined in the plan was to focus
R&D programs on technology partnerships for monitoring, maintenance, and rapid renewal
of the physical infrastructure.’ The intent is to encourage all Federal agencies to explore
uses of new materials and associated technologies for infrastructure renewal engineering.
Infrastructure renewal is a core element of the Administration’s Technology Policy, as well
as of the 1997 DOT Strategic Plan.

This report focuses on the role of the U.S. Department of Transportation as a partner in
national interagency R&D and technology application efforts relating to advanced materials
and technologies for improved infrastructure maintenance, rehabilitation, and renewal.
Relevant programs for surface transportation infrastructure in the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA), Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), Federal Rail
Administration (FRA), Federal Transit Administration (FTA), Maritime Administration
(MARAD), Coast Guard (USCG), National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
(NHTSA), and Research and Special Programs Administration (RSPA) were reviewed.
Every effort was made to take a ‘systems’ view of surface transportation, to ensure that
intermodal concerns were addressed.

' National Science and Technology Council, Committee on Transportation Research and Development,
Intermodal Transportation Science and Technology Strategy Team, Transportation Science and Technology
Strategy, September 1997, p. 17.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 2


Chapter 5

Findings and Conclusions

Construction of major new surface transportation infrastructure capacity has slowed
dramatically in the United States, while traffic volumes and freight tonnage continue to rise
moderately and steadily for all surface transportation modes. The combination of
increasing travel volume and fixed capacity is creating more congestion and inflicting more
wear on the infrastructure. In addition, air and marine freight cargo traffic is growing,
especially international shipments, and larger, faster ocean freighters are on the drawing
boards. These industry changes are already generating more demand for landside access and
better intermodal connections to the busy surface transportation system.

A surface transportation physical infrastructure system that is in good condition and that
carries people and freight cost effectively is fundamental to meeting four of DOT’s five
Strategic Goals: safety, mobility, economic growth and national security. DOT’s 1997
Conditions and Performance Report shows that the U.S. surface transport system is
functioning at an acceptable, though not optimum, level. Thus, it is essential to ask what
resources are necessary to assure that the surface transportation infrastructure remains in
sufficiently good condition to ensure that these goals are met over the coming decades.
DOT estimates that an annual investment of $46 billion would be required from all sources
just to maintain current conditions and levels of congestion. An additional $34 billion
would be required to correct deficiencies and provide a higher level of service.

The Nation’s transportation infrastructure managers must find ways to do things better,
cheaper, and faster — as well as safely. To the extent possible, the advantages of new
technologies, tools, materials, and methods must be explored and their movement into the
field accelerated. Under these circumstances, R&T programs to help this process appear to
be more important than ever. However, research for this report found that approximately
90 percent of DOT R&T resources and most Departmental technology development and
technology partnership efforts are focused on transportation system operations. Less than
10 percent of DOT’s R&T resources are allocated to infrastructure preservation and
renewal. R&T for transportation infrastructure has been carried out primarily by the
FHWA, which estimates that about 30 percent of its FY 1998 R&T funding is used for this
purpose. Without further analysis it is difficult to determine just what the appropriate
amount for infrastructure renewal might be, but it is important for DOT to consider that
question seriously.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 44


operations, and establish in-transit visibility. Many of the benefits from the DOD
partnership efforts may accrue to the civil sector, which could take advantage of a global
commercial intermodal transportation network, including vessels, logistics management
services, infrastructure, terminals and equipment, communications and cargo tracking
networks.

Despite this potential, the complexity of the operations and technologies involved in ocean
shipping has made it increasingly difficult to pursue more effective Federal R&T and
infrastructure maintenance policies. Public-private partnerships, joint ventures, and
extensive training have emerged as the most effective approaches to managing these needs.
MARAD’s CHCP program is moving to a focus on training, and to encouraging broader
participation by DOD and private sector beneficiaries.

Lessons Learned

Based on this assessment of the surface transportation infrastructure research and
technology transfer programs, a number of important factors are key to the success of any
innovation. The following appear to be critical to successful programs.

The results of innovative research activities must be of strategic significance to the

intended users — strategic in the sense that the result relates to a critical agency function,
and significant in the sense that it make a discernible difference in performance or cost
from the viewpoint of the implementing organization. At a minimum, this implies a need
for the endorsement of the Chief Executive Officers within implementing agencies; ideally,
the agency leaders will provide a strong mandate for and commitment to implementing
favorable findings.

Among the most important lessons learned is that applied research should not be initiated
without the commitment of prospective implementers. In addition, such research should

not be considered complete until the results are implemented.

User-defined performance criteria and measures are helpful in guiding research activities.
Early and ongoing involvement of intended users is essential to ensure meaningful results
that will be practical and applicable in the appropriate institutional context. Users control
implementation by choosing whether to adopt an innovation based on their acceptance
criteria. Consequently, it is important to establish such criteria in functional terms early in
the research process and to affirm these criteria periodically.

The research process must include testing under controlled and “uncontrolled” field
conditions. Controlled testing is necessary to isolate and analyze critical technical
variables, whereas “uncontrolled” testing is necessary to reveal and assess institutional
impediments to implementation. Another testing element relates to establishing
performance-based specifications and test protocols for pre-qualifying or certifying a new

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 42


Focusing R&T for Infrastructure Renewal and Preservation

This review of DOT R&T has indicated a Department-wide dedication to the value of R&T
consistent with the mission and purpose of each modal organization. However, for many
institutional reasons, the potential cross-modal synergies of the resources the Department
devotes to R&T programs have not yet been realized. A notable exception is the ITS Joint
Program Office which, after several years of effort, has succeeded in providing a focus for
ITS technologies for highway use and traffic operations, and for transit vehicles and
operators. JPO is sponsoring the development of programs that include highway, transit,
railroad, and maritime interests, as well as intermodal issues.

A similar, coordinated Department-wide R&T effort could focus on harnessing the benefits
of these and other useful technologies, as well as advanced materials, and applying them to
infrastructure condition monitoring, maintenance, and rapid renewal. FHWA’s current
infrastructure-related R&T programs provide a platform on which to build a broader
Departmental effort. The Department could also focus efforts to seek cross-modal
applications, explore and implement cross-modal synergies, and facilitate transfers of
technology applications across modes. To meet the Department's goal of improving
intermodal linkages, some joint efforts among highway, port, airport, transit and rail
research groups for surface transport infrastructure technology development and
applications seem to be warranted. In addition, the Department may choose to initiate
cooperative interagency R&T programs to realize technology benefits from other Federal
agencies.

To accomplish all this successfully, the DOT may want to consider establishing a center or
focal point for infrastructure preservation that would concentrate on issues associated with
physical infrastructure monitoring, maintenance, and rapid renewal. This center could track
progress against benchmark goals, established by consensus among R&T experts. These
goals might include such items as increasing estimated pavement life by 10 years across the
states; reducing time required for maintenance, construction, and reconstruction by a
reasonable percentage; and reducing or eliminating user time lost through reconstruction.
Having identified the importance of benchmarks, it is only fair to reiterate that gains in
infrastructure condition from new technologies become apparent only over time. The
challenge of fitting physical infrastructure-related R&T programs into the framework of the
Government Performance and Results Act is readily acknowledged.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 48




Despite the difficulties associated with implementation, the pursuit of innovation is
endorsed as essential by those interviewed. Funding pressures to “do more with less” are
spurring a new focus on research that helps to identify better ways of “doing business.” It
is assumed that research results address relevant goals; have been proven in actual field
conditions; and address critical institutional and organizational implementation factors.

Organizational and institutional barriers are widely recognized as significant impediments
to realizing the benefits of a broad range of highway research results with the potential for
high benefit/cost ratios. Barriers range from a simple lack of awareness regarding new
developments, to concerns about readiness and proven effectiveness over time, to
organizational policies and practices that hinder change. This suggests a need to evaluate
innovations from the viewpoint of the intended beneficiaries —- to focus on the outcome of
field testing under real-world conditions, rather than the results of artificial academic
experiments.

New methods, materials, and technologies that can extend the useful life of pavement and
bridges and reduce life-cycle costs can play a key role in reducing the gap between apparent
need and available resources. There are several examples of these innovations, such as
“Superpave” asphalt pavements that increase pavement life by ten percent or possibly more
(see Chapter 3). However, significant up-front investments in staff training, expanded
testing facilities, or more costly materials may be required to reap longer-term savings.
Such tradeoffs are difficult for agencies that are under pressure to produce tangible near-
term improvements. This creates a bias toward making minimal improvements on a large
number of roads, rather than concentrating funding on a small number of facilities to create
more significant improvement over the long run.

Federal research programs have modified their goals over the past decade, shifting
gradually from developing materials and technologies for building new roads and bridges to
maintaining and rebuilding existing facilities. It is true that many innovations are relevant
to reconstruction as well as new construction; it also is true that research is being conducted
on condition monitoring and infrastructure modernization. New facilities account for less
than one-half of one percent of the highway inventory, and the cost of maintaining traffic
flow during reconstruction can on occasion equal or exceed the costs of the facility itself.
Therefore, more resources could be directed at the challenges of monitoring, maintaining
and rapidly renewing existing road and bridge facilities.

Transit: Attitudes within the transit industry are changing significantly. According to the
Urban Mobility Corporation Innovation Brief on mass transit,

“{c]oncepts and ideas that appeared radical a decade ago — such as
competitive contracting and transit brokerage — no longer seem threatening.
Technologies that looked forbidding and intimidating to the older generation
of transit operators are taken for granted by the younger managers, educated
and trained in the age of computers. There is a new willingness to look at

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 40


for airport runway projects to preserve, improve, and expand the over 650 million square
yards of airport runway pavement. For the past several years, annual funding for airport
surface infrastructure activities has been approximately $2 billion, with most of this
funding directed toward the 67 largest airports.’

Summary

Federal funding and resources devoted to highway maintenance and operations by States
and localities have increased to all-time highs, and the recent Transportation Equity Act for
the 21 Century (TEA 21) of 1998 authorizes continued historic levels of spending.
Despite these increases, however, there is room for improvement. Transit agencies face the
dual challenge of renewing the oldest systems such as New York and Boston, and the
simultaneous maturing of newer systems, like those in San Francisco and Washington DC.
Commuter rail passenger growth has required expansion and modernization for many
systems. Although progress has been made in reversing deterioration for the older
facilities, continued renewal and some major reconstruction will be necessary over the
coming decades for every transit system’s infrastructure.

The Nation’s port and railroad infrastructures also must modernize and renew while coping
with increasing demand. The number of intermodal container movements is growing. In
addition, there are significant increases in the size and configuration of the ships and trains
carrying the containers and the trucks moving the containers to their final destinations.
This creates more demand for landside access and intermodal facilities, particularly at the
most active ports. The responsibility for maintaining and managing the maritime
infrastructure is spread among multiple public and private sector entities. This greatly
complicates making decisions about large infrastructure and surface access project
financing and implementation.

Technology can and should play a pivotal role in meeting the demands for maintaining
infrastructure in good working condition, providing better service, and keeping preservation
and life-cycle costs as low as possible. However, for technology to be effective, the rate of
adoption by those responsible for project implementation must accelerate. The following
chapters identify key technologies and point to promising avenues leading in the direction
of realizing their capabilities.

'$ Approximately half of this annual investment in surface infrastructure is provided through the FAA Airport
Improvement Program's Grants-in-Aid to Airports, with the other half is provided by State and local
governments and airport operators. Airport Improvement Program funding comes primarily from the aviation
ticket tax, the receipts of which are deposited into the Airport and Aviation Trust Fund.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 12


flexible pavements that last longer and require less maintenance than conventional asphalt
concrete pavements. Superpave pavements have the potential to last up to ten percent
longer than conventional pavements. However, Superpave is not as forgiving as
conventional asphalt paving materials. Using Superpave requires greater technical
sophistication and tighter process control on the part of construction crews and inspectors
to assure proper results. These factors may represent additional up-front costs to an
infrastructure owner.

Although specific SHRP research funding ceased in 1993, the benefits of the program
continue to be realized through a systematic implementation program funded by FHWA.
The Research and Technology Executive Board (RTEB) and the SHRP Implementation
Coordination Group (SICG) provide overall oversight and coordination of the FHWA
SHRP implementation efforts, including the following:

e Publication of, broad consensus on, and participation in the SHRP Implementation
Plan” for fielding products and for technical training and technology transfer support;
and

¢ Preparation, training and fielding of technology module “showcase packages” for
demonstration and delivery to the States via FHWA regional offices and through
industry and State workshops.

Products have been developed, modularized, and packaged for Asphalt, Concrete and
Structures, Highway Operations, and Long Term Pavement Performance under the
guidance of Technical Working Groups (TWGs), which include FHWA, State DOTs,
industry, associations, and users. The AASHTO Task Force on SHRP Implementation and
the TRB SHRP Committee provide external support and advice. This implementation
program is designed to involve the public and private highway community in the
development, evaluation, promotion, and adoption of SHRP technology, and to involve
private industry in the manufacturing of SHRP products. 3

Many of the Road Weather Information Systems (RWIS) applications received initial
support from the SHRP and their products continue to be disseminated, including
information on snow and ice control practices and on storm monitoring and
communications. Individual State and local transportation agencies are now devoting their
own resources to continuing some of the efforts initiated under SHRP, an indicator of the
success of the program’s technology development implementation efforts.°* A

See the Internet Web site at http://www.tfhrc.gov/pubrds/winter94.

33 Additional information on SHRP is available on the Internet at http:/ota.fhwa.dot.gov/roadsvr.

*4 Similar applications of weather information systems to highway maintenance and operations can be found
overseas, particularly in ‘cold weather’ countries such as Sweden and Finland. In fact, the Swedish National
Road Administration (SNRA) has estimated that their system generates cost savings equal to three times the
annual cost of the system. J. Schiavone, R. Puentes and C. Eng, “ITS and Meteorology: A Critical
Partnership”, 1997, passim.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 30


Surface Transportation
Research and Technology

Assessment

May 1999

PROTECTED UNDER INTERNATIONAL COPYRIGHT
ALL RIGHTS RESERVED.

NATIONAL TECHNICAL INFORMATION SERVICE
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


U.S. DOD/TRANSCOM Programs

Since the reduction of U.S. military forces stationed outside of the continental United
States, the ability to move military power rapidly in support of National security objectives
worldwide demands a modern, efficient, and seamless transportation system. This system
will include both government and commercial maritime facilities and vessels. The U.S.
Transportation Command (TRANSCOM), one of the nine unified DOD commands, is the
single manager of all DOD transportation requirements in peace and war, including air,
land, and sea. USTRANSCOM sponsors a number of R&T-oriented programs, including
the Army’s Strategic Mobility Program, Ports for National Defense, Deployment
Technologies, Agile Ports, and National Port Readiness Network, that focus on using
technologies to increase the speed and effectiveness of the deployment of U.S. forces.
These programs are conducted with other agencies, including the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency, MARAD, and the Center for Commercial Development of
Transportation Technologies (CCDoTT). Appendix C describes some of the DOD R&T
programs relevant for civilian infrastructure preservation programs.

Asset Management

Asset Management involves a systematic, interdisciplinary approach to maintaining,
upgrading, and operating physical infrastructure assets. It goes beyond traditional
engineering analysis to include management and economic considerations when deciding
the best course of action with respect to transportation facilities. Making informed choices
regarding maintenance and reconstruction requires the ability to monitor condition
indicators and accurately predict infrastructure performance. Advanced sensors, computer
information systems and other new technologies are important enabling tools for Asset
Management. The use of Asset Management to focus attention on transportation
infrastructure as an asset that requires monitoring and replenishing is relatively recent,
although it has been practiced by capital-intensive businesses for some time.

Asset Management provides useful tools for establishing infrastructure maintenance
requirements. For example, using Asset Management data and analysis, the U.S. Air Force
was able to demonstrate to the Congress a need to establish an annual stipend for
maintaining existing infrastructure based on asset depletion rates. Thus, as new facilities
are added to and deleted from the inventory, or facilities within the inventory are
rehabilitated, maintenance funding is adjusted accordingly. Effective use of Asset
Management also could reduce the financial burden of physical infrastructure preservation
for all modes. The management techniques and tools are helpful for privately owned.
infrastructure, such as railroad tracks and ports, and for publicly owned roads, bridges, and
transit systems.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 23


‘Annual Rail Lift Capacity : be
I< seo. Po x

*K

84,000
port TEU Throughput (million:

ity importiexport figures\ ees se
(boxed) are in millions of dollars.
Top Rail Terminals (text) include annual lit figure _
Sources: : == ‘
‘Seaports of the Americas,1996 EC js dope - ay
.

Containerization International Yearbook
Global Trade Information Services, Waterborne Trade Atlas.
IANA, Rait Intermodal Terminal Directory

Figure 5. Major Intermodal Rail and Maritime Terminals

Amtrak is the nation’s only intercity passenger railroad. With the exception of a few high-
density corridors (particularly in the northeastern United States, Los Angeles, and
Chicago), freight railroads own the tracks and infrastructure used by Amtrak and commuter
railroads. Amtrak carried 20.7 million passengers and produced 5.5 billion passenger miles
on intercity routes in 1995, for revenues of $1.5 billion. Amtrak operates many of the
Nation’s commuter railroad services for transit agencies. Commuter rail traffic has been
the most rapidly growing segment of the railroad industry, with the number of passenger
trips increasing by 27 percent over the past ten years.

Railroad and grade crossing fatalities declined significantly from 1960 through 1995, with
fatalities down by nearly 40 percent and grade crossing accidents down by nearly 60
percent. Human factors and track defects are considered to be the most significant causes
of these accidents; 35 percent of accidents are attributable to human factors, while track
defects account for 34 percent of the accidents. Equipment defects and other factors are
responsible for the remainder.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 9


In other modes, such as MARAD, FRA, and FAA, surface transportation infrastructure
stewardship is not the primary agency mission and does not receive significant R&T
resources. '° At the FRA, for example, most R&T activities focus on railroad safety
because that is the Agency’s foremost responsibility. Furthermore, most railroad
infrastructure is owned by private sector freight companies, which operate largely without
Federal funding. Indeed, only one FRA research program — bridge monitoring, funded at
about $200,000 in FY 1998 — was identified as being aimed at infrastructure
preservation.'’ The majority of the FAA’s substantial R&T program funding supports
safety-related research and technologies for air traffic control modernization, which is
largely a renewal of the FAA operational infrastructure. That Agency recently has
supported its Airport Pavement Research Program at an annual level of $5 million.

Despite understandably different modal missions, goals, and constituencies, DOT R&T
programs, including those focused on operations, already explore many technologies that
are adaptable for infrastructure preservation. The remainder of this chapter describes a
cross-section of DOT modal research programs to illustrate the technology opportunities
available for other applications already supported within the Department.

Technologies Adaptable to Monitoring

Sensing, locating, and communications technology applications tied to computers and
databases increasingly are being used in all modes to improve operations. In some cases,
especially for highways and transit, these applications come under the heading of Intelligent
Transportation Systems (ITS). Intelligent Transportation Systems involve the effective
application of advances in communications, navigation, sensor, and information processing
technologies to transportation. These technologies in some form are being implemented in
all modes, but a strong Federal role in ITS for highways and transit was authorized in
ISTEA, which provided an annual DOT budget of approximately $200 million for ITS
research and demonstration activities. Support for ITS is continued by the TEA 21
reauthorization.

Within DOT, the ITS Joint Program Office (JPO) is responsible for Department-wide
coordination and planning of ITS activities. The JPO is located in the FHWA; other DOT
organizations that are active in ITS are the FTA, NHTSA, FRA, RSPA and the Office of

the Secretary.

Following are examples of DOT-sponsored ITS and related technology R&T programs that
could be adapted for infrastructure monitoring:

'6 While infrastructure stewardship is an important FTA mission, infrastructure renewal and rehabilitation has
not recently been a top priority for FTA R&T. The majority of FTA’s grant recipients operate only bus
systems, and do not maintain their own infrastructure. Those transit agencies maintaining their own rail
infrastructure receive significant capital funding from FTA's fixed guideway investment program for renewal
of rolling stock and facilities.

‘7 Federal Railroad Administration, Office of Research and Development, April 1998.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 1S


of the exported containers and 25 percent of the imported containers moving through U.S.
ports exceeded the FHWA limits for their respective container/chassis weight. Many ports
are reluctant to enforce highway weight limits, fearing a loss of shipping business in this
highly competitive industry.

Finally, responsibility for managing ports and waterways and performing maintenance and
monitoring functions is shared by Federal, state, local, and private entities. Federal
agencies involved in marine transportation include the U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), Department of Defense (DOD), and MARAD. Environmental
considerations, including wetlands protection and coastal land use regulations, limit the
ability of many ports to provide additional landside access.

Airports

The United States has over 5,400 public use airports providing the Nation with the
infrastructure and services necessary for successful operation of the world's largest aviation
system. In 1995, the air transportation system accommodated 5,567 passenger aircraft that
flew a collective total of over 4.6 billion miles. Flying in those aircraft were more than 548
million enplaned passengers. In addition, 12.5 billion domestic ton-miles of freight were
transported by air in 1995."

Airport runways, taxiways, and aprons are discussed in this report, because the results of
aviation-related pavement R&T programs are applicable to surface transportation
infrastructure in other modes. The total investment in airport surface infrastructure
currently exceeds $100 billion. In several respects, runway performance and condition are
as critical to safe airport operations as air traffic control. First, ramway operations can
minimize the risks associated with weather. From 1980 to 1991, 130 aircraft accidents
were directly attributed to runway overruns and veer-offs resulting from snow, ice, water,
and rubber deposits on runways. In addition, pavement outages and downtime for
maintenance and rehabilitation contribute to the costs associated with aviation system
delays. Many research and technology efforts are directed toward reducing the impact of
runway maintenance and other pavement outages on airport traffic operations, thereby
reducing overall aviation system delays. In addition, the FAA airport research and
technology program is seeking to improve runway traction and safety characteristics

To accommodate the next decade of anticipated strong growth in global aviation, the
Federal government continues to make substantial investments in airport infrastructure,
including airport pavements. In 1994, FAA planners approved some 1,500 applications

BUS. Department of Transportation, NTS 1997, p. 212.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT ie


Asset Management is an emerging DOT program that will be undergoing major
development in 1998, with significant deployment unlikely before 1999. FHWA will work
with the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO)
to develop Asset Management policy tools and assist with professional tool development.
A key recommendation is that technology that has been used to improve the safety and
efficiency of operations should be applied to increase the efficient management of
infrastructure assets.

Implications for Transportation R&T

Clearly, DOT’s R&T innovation efforts are alive and well. Just as clearly, DOT R&T
programs are missing opportunities to explore the potential of new technologies that were
developed to improve operations but also have applications for surface transport
infrastructure maintenance, monitoring, and rapid renewal. The DOT R&T emphasis on
sensing, locating, and telecommunications technology for ensuring safe and efficient
operations reflects rapid advances in these same tools by the private sector. However,
using the data and the power generated by these technologies primarily for modally specific
operational improvements results in missing many of their possible benefits for physical
infrastructure preservation and renewal as well as cross-modal synergy. Promising
technologies and innovations with potential applications to cross-modal surface
transportation infrastructure preservation include sensing, locating, computer and
telecommunications technologies for monitoring; Asset Management databases and
advanced models for maintenance; and durable advanced materials and computerized tools
suitable for rapid renewal and construction techniques.

Extending the applications of these technologies to different transportation infrastructures
will help to allocate resources more effectively and efficiently. The importance of rapid
renewal — the repair and replacement of infrastructure with minimal operational disruption
— suggests a need for a new emphasis on research and technology for monitoring that also
can support resource allocation decisions. In fact, as shown in Box 2, a well-managed rapid
renewal effort can enable a region to restore key services more quickly and cost-effectively.
For example, monitoring data could be used for setting maintenance and reconstruction
priorities, as well as for allocating resources during inclement weather conditions. In
addition, these capabilities facilitate more cost-effective use of the human resources
devoted to maintenance and monitoring, and enable more widespread use of improved
infrastructure management techniques such as Asset Management.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 24


and streets) went toward preserving or upgrading existing facilities to meet current design
standards. Of the remainder, $8.9 billion in capital investment was directed toward
improved capacity, $5.4 billion was invested in new roads and bridges, and $3.2 billion
was invested in other improvements such as safety features, traffic control systems, and
noise barriers.’ In addition to capital investments, $44.8 billion was spent on non-capital
expenditures, including $24.5 billion for maintenance.‘

As encouraged by the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991,
states and localities have increased the emphasis on system preservation, maintenance, and
operations. In constant dollars, spending for highway maintenance and operations
(including research and administration) grew at twice the rate of total highway spending
from 1960 to 1993. This trend is expected to continue as the massive highway construction
associated with building the Interstate Highway System draws to a close. However,
highway infrastructure needs are expected to grow over the coming decade, with both
freight and passenger travel continuing to climb. Figure 4 shows the growth trend in U.S.
freight tonnage for railroads and trucks, and the total for all modes.

8000
7000
6000
© 5000
ro}

§ 4000
c

3000 |

ons

Millio

2000 -~—+

1000

(0) + + + +

1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995
Year

—eRail =i Truck (ICC and non-ICC) ie Total of all modes

Figure 4. Freight Tonnage Rail, Truck, and Total

Source: The Eno Transportation Foundation, Inc., Transportation in America: Historical Compendium,
1939-1995, 1997, p. 19.

3 [bid., pp. 45-46. About $80 billion would be required to materially improve conditions to achieve optimum

economic efficiency.
* Ibid.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 6


HPS
IcC
IDEA
ISTEA
ITI

ITS
JPO
LTAP
LTPP
MARAD
MTAMS
MTMC
NCHRP
NDE
NDT
NHI
NHTSA
NIST
NOAA
NSF
NSTC
NTPEP
ORTA
OST
PAIR
PTC
PTP
R&D
R&T
RE&D
RPU
RSPA
RTEB
RWIS
SHRP
SICG
SNRA
SOCP
STP
TCRP
TEA 21
TEU
TRANSCOM
TRB

High-Performance Steel

Interstate Commerce Commission

Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis
Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act
Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure

Intelligent Transportation Systems

Joint Program Office

Local Transportation Assistance Program
Long-Term Pavement Performance Program
Maritime Administration

Marine Terminal Automated Management Systems
Military Traffic Management Command, Department of Defense
National Cooperative Highway Research Program
Nondestructive Evaluation

Nondestructive Testing

National Highway Institute

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
National Institute of Standards and Technology
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
National Science Foundation

National Science and Technology Council
National Transportation Product Evaluation Program
Office of Research and Technology Applications
Office of the Secretary of Transportation
Partnership for the Advancement of Infrastructure and its Renewal
Positive Train Control

Priority Technologies Program

Research and Development

Research and Technology

Research, Engineering and Development

Remote Processing Unit

Research and Special Programs Administration
Research and Technology Evaluation Board

Road Weather Information Systems

Strategic Highway Research Program

SHRP Implementation Coordination Group
Swedish National Road Administration

Ship Operations Cooperative Program

Surface Transportation Program

Transit Cooperative Research Program
Transportation Equity Act for the 21 Century
Twenty-foot container Equivalent Unit

U.S. Transportation Command, Department of Defense
Transportation Research Board

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

A-2


e

Cross-modal efforts to leverage the synergies of such core technologies to improve
intermodal operations are beginning in DOT; similar cross-modal applications should
be considered for infrastructure preservation and renewal.

Major technological advances have been made in two key areas for physical
infrastructure preservation:

1. The development of stronger, lighter, and more durable materials, useful for
maintenance, renewal and life cycle cost reduction; and

2. The development of remote sensing and non-destructive evaluation tools and
related positioning and communications technologies. These are essential for
condition monitoring and maintenance and rapid renewal scheduling and
management.

Wider adoption by State and local government agencies and industry of these new
technologies and the management techniques they can support could save billions of
dollars over the next few decades.

Technology transfer programs aimed at deploying new technologies in the field have
had some success for highway applications. Experts agree that R&T programs
leading to technology innovations must be backed by validated performance results,
strong incentives and technology champions. Only then will States be more likely to
adopt the technologies and incorporate them as best practices.

Although this report provides an initial look at US DOT R&T programs for surface
transportation infrastructure preservation, the findings point to several important
additional policy questions that the Department should consider. These include:

Should more R&T resources be focused on surface transportation infrastructure
preservation? It can be argued that less than ten percent of the Agency R&T total is
too small an amount relative to the crucial economic importance of a smoothly
functioning physical surface transport system.

How much of the total R&T funding should be devoted to technology transfer
and deployment and how are cross-modal applications best encouraged? Since
years of effort to improve the process have produced only modest success, wider use
of structured incentives through project funding streams might be encouraged.

How should a DOT-wide focal point for the cross cutting, intermodal benefits of
physical infrastructure preservation R&T be structured? A major role would be
bridging the significant gaps between the FHWA’s efforts and the needs of the other

modes for durable, high service, low maintenance surface transportation connections.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT iv


High-performance construction materials include high-performance concrete (HPC), which
has compressive strength of 10,000 pounds per square inch (psi), in contrast to the 5,000
psi of conventional concrete. HPC is also durable and resistant to corrosion and
environmental deterioration. Such materials can reduce the cost of new bridge construction
by 10 percent, representing potential cost savings of up to $100 million per year if half of
the new bridges built in the United States use HPC.

Similarly, high performance steel (HPS) is considerably stronger than conventional
structural steel, on the order of 70,000 kilograms per square inch (ksi) compared to 50,000
ksi strength. This higher strength can accommodate greater traffic loads by decreasing the
structural “dead” load (the weight of the bridge itself) that must be supported.

New composite materials and high-strength aluminum offer similar performance
improvement options. Research focused on the development and refinement of composite
materials has demonstrated that although such materials are more costly than concrete or
steel, their lighter weight and high strength offer advantages for bridge construction and
repair. Recently, for example, a $3 million, two-lane, 540-foot bridge was constructed in
Canada using carbon-fiber-reinforced polymer and glass-fiber-reinforced polymer beams
that weigh 80 percent less and are six times stronger than conventional steel beams. In
addition, they should last 50 percent longer than steel or concrete and, by eliminating these
materials, greatly reduce the need for preventive maintenance to avoid corrosion damage,
according to one engineering assessment.”

Composites also are useful for seismic reinforcement. An advanced composite renewal
method, which involves wrapping thin carbon-fiber composite jackets around bridge
support pillars, may replace steel jacketing. This retrofitting technology uses advanced
composites for bridge column wrapping and deck repair; these weigh only 300 Ibs. but
offering similar strength and more durability than 3,000 Ibs. of concrete. This promises to
be competitive with respect to cost, speed of repair (ten to fifty times faster than steel), ease
of use, and performance under earthquake conditions.”

The FAA and the Boeing Company have joined in a Cooperative Research And
Development Agreement (CRADA) to launch a $21 million research effort that will
address the increased runway pavement impact of the next generation of large civil
transport aircraft, such as the Boeing 777. As part of this agreement, a test machine is
being developed that will help identify new procedures necessary for designing airport
pavements to meet the requirements of these new aircraft. Supporting this research effort
are the Army Corps of Engineers and DMJM/Cornell Joint Venture.

2 Bodamer, David, “A Composite Sketch,” Civil Engineering, January 1998, p. 57.
24 Brecher, Dr. Aviva, “Materials Research and Technology Initiatives,” U.S. Department of Transportation,
Research and Special Programs Administration, November 1995, DOT-T-96-01, p. 16.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 2


Communications-based train control systems, the subject of FRA-sponsored research under
the Positive Train Control (PTC) Program, could have significant implications for
infrastructure monitoring and maintenance. The hard-wire signal systems are likely to be
replaced with a system of on-board computers linked by digital data radio to control center
computers. Pole lines carrying communications and signaling circuits, which are costly to
maintain, are being replaced with microwaves, fiber optics, and integrated digital voice and
data systems.

Concerns have been raised that broken rail detection capability would be lost as these
systems supplant the current track and wayside-based signal circuits. However, recent
industry-sponsored research has shown that track circuits are effective only in detecting
broken rails that are completely separated when broken, as in rail pull-apart during cold
winters due to excessive tensile stresses. Research also indicated that track circuits did not
offer any warning in the case of partially broken rails, as may result from the growth of
internal material defects due to fatigue. FRA believes that implementing positive train
control does not necessarily justify the elimination of all track circuits. FRA is also funding
the development of a prototype alternative locomotive-mounted device for detecting broken
rails ahead of a moving train. Positive train control minimizes wayside equipment needs,
and changes the established design, procurement, operation,

and maintenance practices. It can increase effective capacity; improve running time, asset
utilization, and reliability, and enhance safety by reducing the risk of collisions.

Ports: Federally-sponsored maritime programs use sensors, radio frequency devices,
wireless systems, radar, satellite-based communications, and software systems, the same
types of technologies used by road traffic managers, to monitor and manage navigation and
port operations. MARAD, in conjunction with industry, has two ongoing cooperative
research programs using these technologies to facilitate cargo handling by ports. One of
these programs, the Marine Terminal Automated Management System (MTAMS),
represents a pioneering effort by MARAD and the port industry to develop an automated
terminal control system that would enhance the accuracy and timeliness of information
related to terminal operations. It is designed to provide an on-line inventory of containers,
cargo, and chassis, and their respective locations. This inventory is updated by transactions
entered at the five major operating nodes within a terminal: gate, yard office, window
office, container control, and vessel planning.'”

'? One variation on such an automated system is the Maher Terminals’ chassis-mounted container system
(CMCS). This system is used to make equipment selection decisions, provide directions at strategic locations,
monitor activity and report exceptions, control inventory and equipment usage, and provide current and
historical data. Maher terminals use an on-line real-time terminal management computer system with major
modules for terminal operations, manifest systems, equipment maintenance, chassis pool operations, off-
terminal (inland) tracing, and financial reporting system.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 18


TABLE OF CONTENTS

Executive Summary ....

INtrOGUCTION 0... eseseteteee cs eseeeseeeaeeseeeesesesesesesasassaseeeeseseseneeerasassaseseecesesaseeesarsseesreeseceececensnse 1

1. Surface Transportation System Baseline Condition and Performance ...........-2s00+ 4

2. DOT Research Programs and Promising Technologies ..

3. Technology Innovation and Dissemination Program .............::::cseseseeeeeeeeeeeeeee 27
4. Progress Made under ISTEA and Lessons Learned..........sseesecesessseeeseseseeeseeneeseeee 39
5. Findings and Conclusions. ........sscsseccscssccssssesseesesessnseseseseseasnensssesesensaseseseeseseeeeenee 44
Appendix A: ACFOnyMs ........c:.csccecesessssssesesssssessassesteeseeseessessseeeseseeeeaessesenesesseeeeessaeesacess A-1

Appendix B: Estimate of R&T Funding of Physical Infrastructure
Maintenance, Monitoring, and Renewal, FY 1998..........c:cccssscsesssssescssssseeeesesseeceeaneee B-1

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT i




As traffic on the Nation’s network of roads and streets increases, the most heavily traveled
segments become overloaded, severely degrading operational performance. Since 1985,
traffic on urban Interstate highways has grown steadily at an average rate of 2.4 percent per
year. The result is that congestion within segments of the highway network is increasing.
Between 1990 and 1995, the portion of peak-hour urban Interstate highway travel occurring
under congested conditions rose from about 50 percent (1990-92) to about 52 percent
(1993-95). Congested roadways indicate the need for technologies and techniques to
monitor infrastructure condition and determine remaining service life, and for rapid
reconstruction and renewal processes that minimize their contribution to congestion.

Transit

The U.S. transit system consists of 537 public transit operators in 316 urbanized areas.”
Urban mass transit use is concentrated in large cities with both bus and rail service,
including metropolitan New York City (the largest single mass transit market), Los
Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Washington DC, Philadelphia, and Boston. In 1995, the
national transit system included the following:

43,577 buses with 17.0 billion passenger-miles;

8,725 rapid rail and light rail vehicles with 11.4 billion passenger-miles;
4,413 commuter rail vehicles with 8.2 billion passenger-miles;

68 ferries with 243 million passenger-miles; and

12,825 demand response vehicles with 397 million passenger-miles.®

Local governments dominate the operation and maintenance of public transit systems, as
well as funding some construction, but state governments are playing an increasing role in
transit system support. Federal outlays by the FTA include grants to States and local
agencies for the construction, acquisition, and improvement of mass transportation facilities
and equipment, and for the payment of operating expenses. The FTA Grants Program
provides funding to transit agencies for both buses and infrastructure. States can also draw
on Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) funding for environment-related
improvements, as well as other Surface Transportation program (STP) flexible funds for
certain transit activities. Since 1988, FTA has provided capital grants to transit agencies for
purchase of over 2,000 alternative-fuel buses operating on ethanol, methanol, liquefied gas,
and compressed natural gas. In addition, FTA provides research funding. Other current
infrastructure improvements are driven by the need to meet requirements mandated by the
Americans with Disabilities Act, such as the upgrade or installation of gates, signage, and
station monitors. Some funding also is directed towards the physical security of
transportation facilities and their patrons.

TUS. Department of Transportation, 1997 Condition and Performance, p.7.
Sus. Department of Transportation, Transportation Statistics Annual Report (TSAR) 1997, p. 5.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 7


Executive Summary

Because more resources than ever before have been poured into surface transportation
maintenance and reconstruction over the last six years, the United States has kept pace
with its infrastructure maintenance needs. However, within the next ten to fifteen years,
the number of crucial surface connections and arteries needing major renewal will swell,
posing a challenge for officials charged with their stewardship. The task for these
officials is to hold costs within the allocated resources, while keeping surface arteries
open and functioning efficiently, not only during routine maintenance, but also during
major renewal. Complicating matters further, recent data show that traffic congestion,
always aggravated by maintenance activities, plagues more metropolitan areas now than
it did just two years ago. Fortunately, powerful new technologies, materials, equipment,
and methodologies are being explored that can help transportation professionals make
infrastructure improvements better, cheaper, and faster. Unfortunately, however, despite
concentrated efforts to speed the process, new technologies often penetrate the
fragmented surface transport infrastructure marketplace only slowly.

This document reviews Federal research and technology (R&T) programs aimed at
preservation of the surface transportation physical infrastructure through monitoring,
maintenance, and rapid renewal. Relevant programs for all modes of transportation were
examined, including the airport and port infrastructure that serve as critical connections
to the primary surface transportation modes - highway, rail, and transit. This intermodal
approach was essential to assure that the study considered the system impacts on surface
transportation infrastructure — the ways that change in freight tonnage at ports affects
road and railroad access requirements, for example. Key findings include the following:

e U.S. DOT research and technology programs for FY 1998 totaled about $1 billion.
Of this amount, more than $900 million targeted the safety and efficiency of
operations. Less than $100 million of DOT’s 1998 R&T budget was dedicated to
surface transportation infrastructure preservation.’

e Almost all DOT R&T programs that target infrastructure preservation are housed in
the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA). FHWA devotes about 35 percent of
its total R&T resources to this purpose.

¢ Many modal R&T programs use similar types of sensing, positioning, computer, and
communications technologies to monitor or control operations and increasing
throughput. The goal is to make operations safer and more efficient or faster. Many
of these same technologies could be adapted to be very useful for infrastructure
monitoring.

' Physical infrastructure security was not included in the scope of this study.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT iii


Chapter 2

DOT Research Programs and Promising Technologies

Materials, construction practices, and infrastructure use in the United States vary
dramatically from region to region. However, regardless of regional location, the life span
of surface transportation infrastructure is measured in multiple decades, and the impacts of
major technology advances will be realized only over time. Thus, infrastructure facilities
stay relatively constant, while the communities they serve and the demands placed on them
change in major ways. In this context, a constellation of institutional factors must be
favorable for new techniques and methods for maintaining and renewing an aging,
relatively unchanged facility to be acceptable and successful. Moreover, because
transportation innovations often result from advances in a wide range of scientific and
engineering disciplines, support for broad-scale continuing research is necessary to provide
a solid foundation for 21st century transportation technology. Recognizing this, the U.S.
DOT is spending close to $1 billion dollars for R&D programs in recent years, allocated as
shown in Table 1.

Table 1.
Department of Transportation R&D Funding
FY 1997-1999
(Dollars in Millions)

FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999

(Request)
Federal Highway Administration $495.6 $426.4 * $462.4
Federal Railroad Administration 46.3 41.2 42.9
Federal Transit Administration 46.0 57.4 58.2
National Highway Traffic Safety Admin. 56.8 62.9 72.4
Other (e.g., FAA, MARAD, OST, RSPA, 282.1 270.9 258.0
USCG)
Total $926.8 $858.8 $893.9

e Includes funding of $226 million in FY 1998 for the ITS program.

Source: U.S. DOT Office of Budget and Programs

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 13



PORTATION

AYA A

PB99-160574

repropucepey: = NITES.

USS, Department of Commerce =

‘National Technleal information Service
‘Springfield, Virginia 22164

MAY 1999


representatives from the Maritime Administration, U.S. DOT, American President Lines,
Crowley American Transport, and Matson Navigation Company administers the program.
The program calls for improvements in cargo handling relating to the identification and
prototyping of new technologies for container-chassis mating; as well as testing new
technologies related to hand-held computers, electronic seals, tire maintenance and repair,
overweight containers, and container stowage planning. MARAD and the private
participants fund the CHCP. In each of the five years since the program’s inception,
$200,000 per year in Federal funds has been available to the CHCP from MARAD, and the
three shipping companies provide additional resources. The ports of Oakland, CA and
Jacksonville, FL are serving as test sites for these technologies.

Fostering Innovation

The Federal government plays a major role in fostering innovation through its specific and
mandated responsibilities, and as part of its broader “stewardship” over the national
transportation system. A constant stream of innovative technologies and approaches is
being developed by the private sector; but regardless of where an innovation originates, its
benefits cannot be realized without effective technology transfer efforts. Recognizing that
the barriers to infrastructure-related innovation are substantial, the Federal commitment to
fostering innovation includes a responsibility to address impediments to the deployment of
potential improvements. DOT has a number of different organizations within its structure
that are dedicated to various methods of technology transfer and moving new technologies
into the field, both for operations, and to a lesser degree for infrastructure preservation.
These DOT surface transportation technology transfer offices include:

FHWA Office of Technology Applications (OTA);

FHWA Turner-Fairbank Highway Research Center (TFHRC);

FHWA National Highway Institute (NHI);

FRA Office of Research and Development (RDV-30);

NHTSA Office of Research and Development (NRD-01);

FTA Office of Research Management (TRI-30);

RSPA Office of Research Policy and Technology Transfer (DRT-10); and
RSPA Volpe National Transportation System Center.

Through the programs carried out in these and other modal offices, the respective DOT
agencies work with their constituents in a variety of partnership arrangements to facilitate
and stimulate the deployment of innovations. Because the emphasis on technology transfer
varies among the modes, most of the technology transfer efforts are mode-specific. In only
a few instances are cross-modal or intermodal R&T synergies and cooperation actively
sought and nurtured. Two examples of cost-effective cross-modal programs are the
intermodal applications in the ITS area and the cooperative pavement research done by
FAA and FHWA, which is clearly aimed at infrastructure preservation. Doubtless there are
other instances, but it is important to recognize that there are many unutilized opportunities
for cooperative research that could have sizable potential payoff for R&T. In some cases,
such as sensing, locating and communications, technology applications already are used by

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 36




How should DOT ensure that environmental and safety issues related to system
preservation are included in the research? Environmental and safety issues are
included in two of the Department's five strategic goals: safety, mobility, economic
growth and trade, human and natural environment, and national security. No one of
the goals should be diminished in the process of striving toward an individual goal.

What is the most effective way to channel incentives to deployments aimed at
meeting intermodal needs? This is an especially thorny issue, because ownership of
intermodal linkages is often divided between the public and private sectors, and
conflicting goals make partnerships challenging.

What benchmarks are appropriate for assessing the value and cost-effectiveness
of R&T programs for infrastructure preservation and for guiding investment?
Because long-term infrastructure performance and accurate life-cycle cost savings are
not known for many years, setting appropriate performance targets for infrastructure
R&T is not easy.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT v


Appendix A

Acronyms
AASHTO American Association of State Highways and Transportation Officials
ACBM Advanced Cement-based Materials
AE Acoustic Emission
APWA American Public Works Association
ATIP Automated Track Inspections Programs
ATIS Advanced Traveler Information Systems
ATMS Advanced Traffic Management Systems
BART Bay Area Rapid Transit system
BMS Bridge Management System
Caltrans California Department of Transportation
CCDoTT Center for Commercial Development of Transportation Technologies
CERF Civil Engineering Research Board
CHCP Cargo Handling Cooperative Program
CMAQ Congestion Mitigation Air Quality
CMCS Chassis-Mounted Container System
COE Center of Excellence
COTS Commercial Off-The-Shelf
CRADA Cooperative Research And Development Agreement
CRDA Cooperative Research and Development Agreement
DOD Department of Defense
DOT Department of Transportation
EPA Environmental Protection Agency
FAA Federal Aviation Administration
FAST Facility for Accelerated Service Testing
FHWA Federal Highway Administration
FLC Federal Laboratory Consortium
FRA Federal Railroad Administration
FTA Federal Transit Administration
FTSS Federal Track Safety Standards
FY Fiscal Year
GAO General Accounting Office
GIS Geographical Information Systems
GOCO Government-Owned, Contractor-Operated
GOE General Operating Expenses
GPS Global Positioning System
GRMS Gage Restraint Management System
HITEC Highway Innovative Technology Evaluation Center
HPC High-Performance Concrete

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT Al


National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) and Transit Cooperative
Research Program (TCRP)

Both the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), which is a
cooperative program involving participants from the AASHTO, TRB, and FHWA; and the
FTA-sponsored Transit Cooperative Research Program (TCRP) are managed by the TRB.
These programs identify selected State research projects of national significance and
showcase them to the transportation research community. Such applied research programs
serve to generate a pool of promising technologies and also serve as incubators for potential
innovations.

Local Transportation Assistance Program (LTAP)

The LTAP (formerly known as the Rural Technical Assistance Program) has been managed
by the FHWA since 1981. Its purpose is to help local transportation agencies meet the
growing demand for improved local roads and bridges by providing these agencies with
access to highway technologies and training. The program, with annual funding of
approximately $10 million, provides hands-on training courses and materials to local
agencies. These are provided through the FHWA’s National Highway Institute (NHI), as
well as a Nation-wide network of fifty-seven technology transfer centers located at
universities, State transportation agencies, and American Indian Tribal Governments.

The American Public Works Association (APWA) operates the Technology Transfer
Clearinghouse, an LTAP resource center, under contract to the FHWA. Topic areas for
assistance include roads and bridges, drainage, equipment, personnel management,
materials, project schedules and survey methods, and safety-related activities.

ITS

Although the ITS program employs somewhat different types of incentives, its purpose is
consistent with those of the SHRP and other technology support programs: to identify,
promote, develop, and deploy helpful technologies. Since the enactment of ISTEA in 1991,
Federal assistance has contributed to significant progress in developing devices and systems
that improve traffic management, support the selection of optimum routes and modes by
drivers and travelers, and enhance the productivity of the nation’s commercial vehicle fleet
on the highway network. Under the stewardship of the JPO, a national ITS system
architecture has been drafted. Standards and protocols are being developed to enhance the
interoperability of ITS systems and equipment across jurisdictions. Intermodal program
emphases are being developed with the guidance of an intermodal steering committee and
the support of the JPO. Deployment incentives in the form of special funding are made
available to States and localities choosing to implement ITS applications consistent with
national guidelines.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 32


closed-circuit television, radio, and software for control of traffic in navigable waters. VTS
helps to determine the presence of vessels in and around ports, and provides information to
vessels on such matters as position, traffic flow, tides, weather, and port emergencies. One
of the system’s functions is to minimize the risk of grounding by providing oversight and
guidance for vessel docking, thereby improving the utilization of existing berths. The U.S.
Coast Guard has installed and operated VTS in eight major ports: New York, San
Francisco, Houston-Galveston, Puget Sound, Valdez, Morgan City, Louisville, and Sault
Saint Marie.”

Airports: The FAA is the principal sponsor of airport pavement research and technology
initiatives. Based on input from airport operators, air carriers, and aviation associations,
key runway pavement research priorities are identified and pursued through the FAA's
Airport Pavement Technology Program. This program, which received over $5 million in
FY 1997, is coordinated at the FAA Technical Center, in Atlantic City, NJ.”

For many years, airport pavement research and technology has benefited from advances in
the much larger field of highway research, as well as from Department of Defense research
supporting military aircraft and airfields. However, the weight of the next generation of
large civil aircraft may well exceed that of military aircraft. Due to their proposed weight
and landing gear configuration, these aircraft will have unique effects on runway pavement.
The FAA has initiated pavement monitoring and maintenance efforts to address these
impacts. As one example, to better understand the behavior of airport pavements under
operational conditions, the FAA initiated the Airport Pavement Instrumentation Project in
1992 at the new Denver International Airport (which was under construction at the time).
Through an interagency agreement with the Army Corps of Engineers' Waterway
Experiment Station, various sensors were embedded in sections of one runway. Data from
these sensors are collected and stored in an FAA database and are accessible through an
FAA (AAR-410) web server.

Technologies Adaptable for Maintenance and Rapid Renewal

Technical advances in the defense and consumer sectors have produced a rich inventory of
advanced materials and associated structural concepts, tools, and techniques for their use.
Examples include high-performance concrete, new steel alloys, innovative composite
materials and adhesives, imaginative structural concepts, computer-aided design
techniques, automated construction and maintenance tools, and new approaches to
corrosion protection and control. Ongoing research in these areas supports the application
of these features to the transportation infrastructure. These applications may include
demonstrations of effectiveness, suitability for rapid component placement, long-term
durability, reduced need for maintenance, and the reduction of costs to a competitive level.

2! GAO, Marine Safety: Coast Guard Should Address Alternatives as It Proceeds With VTS-2000, Report to
Congressional Requesters, April 1996.

” Other public and private entities also engage in runway pavement research and technology efforts; with few
exceptions, these efforts are funded by, guided by, or in other ways connected to the FAA's runway pavement
research activities.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 20


all the modes and could have cross-modal benefits. Efforts might be undertaken to
understand how the advantages of applying a particular technology to one mode may be
generalized across other modes.

Programs for transferring technologies to address longer term, less conspicuous issues
(such as structural fatigue) are more difficult to implement successfully. One way to
bolster the use of technology innovations is to use partnerships involving both the public
and private sectors, as the HITEC partnership demonstrates. Particularly in the area of rapid
renewal, partnerships could leverage the interest of the private sector with the resources of
the public sector to speed the adoption of new technology.

The most successful technology transfer programs have technologies that are ready for
marketing; address problems that are costly, recurring, and highly visible to infrastructure
owners; and have champions to lead the deployment among peer practitioners. Moreover,
successful demonstrations of surface transportation infrastructure innovations that meet
these criteria are critical to promoting their deployment. The Federal Technology
Innovation Programs represent some of DOT’s responses to these needs. These programs
encompass innovations related to operational safety and efficiency, infrastructure condition
monitoring and maintenance, and technology transfer.

Selected Federal Technology Innovation Programs are listed in Table 2, with an indication
of the problem areas that they address. A review of the relative Federal funding levels for
these programs reveals a great deal about the relative support for technology transfer
programs related to infrastructure R&T. As shown in the FHWA R&T spending summary
in Chapter 2, R&T programs related to infrastructure preservation receive less than half of
that Agency’s total spending on R&T. It is reasonable to raise again the question of
whether this represents an appropriate Federal investment in programs critical to the future
condition and performance of the surface transportation infrastructure.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 37


Box 1
A Step toward Monitoring:
State and Local Telecommunications Activities

Montgomery County, MD has developed a master plan for FiberNet. This is a 550-mile
broadband fiber optic network, which eventually will provide voice, data and video services
to all county departments (including transportation, social services, consumer affairs,
health, and administration, as well as the public schools and libraries) at an estimated cost
of about $22 million. The Montgomery County DOT will use FiberNet to carry signals
from the thousands of traffic signals, variable message signs, video surveillance cameras
and other devices in the county Advanced Traffic Management System (ATMS).”° Once
installed, the network should have sufficient capability to carry signals from embedded
sensors and other monitoring and maintenance-related devices in addition to the ATMS
applications.

As in Montgomery County, nearly every major urban ITS program includes a metropolitan
communications network to carry the vast quantity of video, voice, and data transmissions
required of such installations. Typically, these networks consist of hundreds of miles of
fiber optics and electronics equipment connecting thousands of deployed devices to central
Traffic Management Centers. More advanced networks are being developed for the four
‘Model Deployment’ Intelligent Transportation Infrastructure sites (New York, San
Antonio, Phoenix and Seattle) as well as for Atlanta, Boston, Cincinnati, Houston, and
Minneapolis. A number of state agencies and turnpike authorities, in places as diverse as
New York, Ohio, Maryland, and Missouri among others, are implementing similar systems
or are proposing to use their highway rights-of-way to construct long-distance fiber optic
lines. The excess capacity of these lines, after transportation needs are met, can generate
additional revenue by being sold or rented to other users.

Once in place, a communications line — whether traditional copper, cable or fiber

optic — along a roadway or railroad facilitates the placement of road/railroad condition and
weather sensors and monitors at specific locations. Thus, a weather information or
infrastructure condition monitoring system along a highway or railroad is much easier to
install and operate in conjunction with an effective communications network along the
corresponding right-of-way.

The Ports and Waterways Safety Act of 1972 (as amended) gave the Coast Guard the
responsibility to construct, operate, and maintain a Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) System, a
shore-based waterways management and communications system, at ports that need it for
navigational safety. VTS combines the use of surveillance equipment (principally radar),

20 Montgomery County FiberNet Master Plan: The Montgomery County Information Highway for the
Twenty-first Century, March 1995, passim.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT — 19



LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1: The U.S. Transportation Infrastructure, 1995..

Figure 2: Pavement Condition of U.S. Highways

Figure 3: Deficient Bridges in the National Inventory (1996) ....

Figure 4: Freight Tonnage Rail, Truck, ANd Total........scsssessssesseseessneensseeseneensnseneneenenees 6

Figure 5: Major Intermodal Rail and Maritime Terminals..........sssssecsssseseeeseeeseceeneeeeeeteaes 9
LIST OF TABLES

Table 1: Department of Transportation R&D Funding FY 1997-1999.........ssssssesseeeee 13

Table 2: Surface Transportation R&T Assessment

DOT Technology Innovation Programs...

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT ii


The last ten years have brought increases in infrastructure investment, steady growth in
international trade, and mounting demand for timely delivery of freight. These trends have
forced changes in railroad operating characteristics that may affect the durability of the
existing track structure, including the following:

e Higher axle loads, resulting from increases in the average gross weight per train due to
changes in load types and new double-stack cars for hauling containers;
Increased traffic density, due to growing domestic trade and intermodal freight demand;
Higher locomotive speeds, to meet demands imposed by competitive pressures and just-
in-time requirements;

e Aging, because the risk of track defects relating to bridge failure or material degradation
increases as the infrastructure ages; and

e Reduced maintenance labor capacity - as one indicator of maintenance labor capacity,
the number of maintenance workers per track mile, has been declining steadily.'!

Ports and Waterways

Ports are big business. The nation’s maritime facilities include 26,000 miles of navigable
inland rivers and intra-coastal waterways, and 3,740 port facilities. In 1995, a total of 1.1
billion tons of domestic freight was transported through the U.S. waterways. Roughly 60
percent of the domestic waterborne trade moved on inland rivers and canals, 30 percent on
coastal waterways; and another 10 percent on the Great Lakes. The value of waterborne
international exports and imports traded in international commerce in 1995 totaled $620.4
billion, with the greatest concentration at the ports of Long Beach, Los Angeles, and New
York/New Jersey. All goods move to ports by surface transportation; thus, improvements in
ports and waterways inevitably create more landside traffic, affecting already congested
highways and freight rail connections.

Indeed, at the most active ports, demand for railroad and roadway access currently is
increasing due to growing container movements, larger vessels, and bigger trucks.
Container throughput, which measures the capacity of the marine infrastructure, has risen
by nearly 200 percent over the past fifteen years in the continental United States, from
approximately six million 20-foot equivalent unit (TEUs) in 1980 to just under 17.7 million
TEUs in 1995. Also in recent years, container vessels have increased in size from 3,900
TEU containers to more than 5,000 TEUs, and “megaships” of greater than 6,000 TEUs are
being deployed in world trade. Corresponding increases in truck volume, axle size, weight,
and turning radius requirements to move these heavier containers already are placing
heavier demands on highways at seaports.

In addition, pavement and bridge damage from excessive container weight can be
significant. A survey conducted several years ago indicated that approximately 40 percent

"' GAO, Rail Transportation: Federal Railroad Administration’ s New Approach to Railroad Safety, GAO,
Report to Congressional Requesters, July 1997, estimates that the number of workers per 100 miles of track
declined by approximately 25 percent from 1976 to 1995.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 10


infrastructure may not be realized. R&T on appropriate and cost-effective applications,
management systems, and modeling tools for construction planning and scheduling could
promote greater use by public officials of these rapid renewal technologies.

Technology Transfer Programs

Moving advanced technologies into the infrastructure market poses many challenges. An
advanced technology requires leadership, political appeal, and funding advantages that
outweigh the resistance often associated with long-established ways of doing business. In
addition, there may be practical limitations, such as the size of pre-fabricated components
being manufactured and transported, that cannot be overcome by technology transfer itself.
Research into successful technology transfer programs indicates that the technologies must
be market ready, address problems of significant impact to infrastructure owners, have
sufficient funding, and have champions to lead the transfer efforts among peer practitioners.

The Strategic Highway Research Program's (SHRP) Snow and Ice Removal program is an
example of successful technology transfer to State DOTs, particularly in Northern,
mountain and ‘snow belt’ regions. This effort addressed a costly, highly visible problem
that recurs annually and has environmental consequences -- these factors combine to make
it a top political priority. Other programs that address relatively long-term issues, such as
the development of cost-effective composite bridges, lack such high political visibility and
are much more difficult to “sell” at the state and local level. For effective implementation,
particularly in an emerging industry that has not developed an authoritative professional
organization, institutional issues relating to establishing standard codes, specifications, and
practices must be addressed.

Recognizing that R&T generates practical benefits only when the results are applied in
practice, DOT modal agencies work in appropriate and different ways with their
constituents to facilitate the commercialization and deployment of promising innovations.
FHWA studies have estimated that technology applications and transfer for the highway
community require at least the same amount of resources as were required by the initial
technology research. Consequently, a significant portion of the FHWA's R&T budget is
devoted to technology development and transfer, as well as to programs for implementing
new technologies. Research for this report indicates that if DOT decides to accelerate
infrastructure-related R&T innovation activities, parallel efforts will be needed to foster the
implementation of the innovations. Promising ways to enhance the effectiveness of
technology transfer include identifying champions who can work with lead states to ensure
successful demonstrations, providing documentation of the effectiveness of new
technologies, and fostering peer-to-peer information exchanges. To facilitate deployment,
new ways of partnering between the public and private sectors and providing incentives for
innovation adoption would be useful.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 47


Notes:

1, Funding is taken from FY 1998 Appropriations Conference Report and the Administration’s
proposed NEXTEA legislation. Infrastructure maintenance, monitoring, and renewal is estimated
to be 35 percent of total FHWA proposed FY 1998 R&T program. Turner Fairbank Highway
Research Center Rehabilitation and MBE were not included since they are not R&T activities.
UTC, URI, Eisenhower Fellowships, SPR, and LTAP were not included since much of the work
in these programs is done with minimal, if any, direction from FHWA.

2. Data and analysis from other parts of Highway R&D may support infrastructure maintenance,
monitoring and rehabilitation, but were not included in the table. Examples include the
following: Policy’s traffic monitoring ($3.360 M), and economic and conditions and performance
($2.484 M); Planning’s travel demand modeling ($1.122 M) and congestion management and
mobility ($0.531 M).

3. Subdivisions of Roadway Applications and Structures and Soils were taken from the FY 1998
Budget Justifications. Amounts were determined by assigning prorated shares of the enacted
amount. For instance, the budget request was $1.2 million for Roadway Applications out of a
requested $14.8 for TAD. So $1.08 million was assumed for Roadway Applications under the
enacted total of $13.311 million for TAD.

4. The amount intended for infrastructure renewal for these items was determined by applying
the average amount (39 percent ) calculated for Highway R&T and Technology Assessment and
Deployment.

5. The entire amount for ITS activities in FY 1998 is approximately $226 million. However,
only $31.5 million was enacted for ITS R&D in the FY 1998 appropriations.

&

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT _ B-2


Chapter 3

Technology Innovation and Dissemination Programs

Technological innovation, broadly defined, is critical to meeting the ever-increasing
demands for transportation system capacity. Efforts must be coordinated across the
transportation community to take full advantage of the potential of new technologies,
processes, and operational approaches. Fortunately, the current era of steady technological
advances and tool development shows great promise. Federal R&T is complemented by
the continuing efforts of equipment manufacturers and many service providers to improve
their products in response to market forces. Similarly, transportation carriers constantly
seek to improve their technology, operations, and practices so they can provide better and
more cost-effective services. State and local government agencies with transportation
responsibilities also explore how best to carry out their missions within their resource
constraints.

However, if the benefits of new technologies and innovations resulting from research are to
be realized, effective means must be found to transfer the latest knowledge of these tools,
concepts, and applications to practitioners in the field. A select group of DOT technology
innovation and dissemination programs and activities were reviewed to consider various
strategies for fostering innovation, and to identify lessons learned about what is needed for
success. The Federal programs discussed in this chapter are those aimed directly at
technology transfer or at creating new partnerships for that purpose. They have a near-term
focus that could have a significant impact on monitoring, maintenance, and rapid renewal
for surface transport infrastructure. For the most part, they focus on developing and
implementing technologies that address specific problems, rather than on programs with
broader, enabling technological goals. In addition, efforts were made to ensure coverage of
all modes of transportation.

Beyond the programs considered in this chapter, there are many additional DOT R&D
programs and initiatives, such as the Innovations Deserving Exploratory Analysis (IDEA)
program. Such programs were not included because their primary goals are to extend the
frontiers of knowledge or achieve research breakthroughs, rather than to advance the state-
of-the-practice through the adoption of innovative methods and technologies by surface
transportation agencies.

Market Context for Infrastructure Innovation

Before describing these programs, however, it is useful to acknowledge the substantial
difficulties that infrastructure-related innovations and their proponents must overcome
before they can move into widespread use. Principal among these barriers is the
fragmented nature of both the construction industry (the infrastructure providers) and its
market, the public and private owners of surface transportation infrastructure. Most of the

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 27


surface transportation construction firms are small, local companies and contractors that are
the backbone suppliers of labor and equipment for most local projects. The construction
industry as a whole has a relatively small number of very large firms that focus on large,
complex projects and conduct business both nationally and internationally.”

Ina similar fashion, the market for innovations in surface transportation infrastructure
technology is dispersed because the infrastructure ownership is varied (as detailed in
Chapter 1). The owners of most highways, roads, and bridges usually are public sector
entities, such as state, regional, or local governments. Nearly all of the railroad
infrastructure owners are part of the private sector. Regional authorities or major cities
own the largest airports.*! Port terminals and other buildings usually are privately owned,
although a private railroad or local government authority may own the connecting surface
infrastructure. Taken together, the many infrastructure owners and the fragmented nature
of the providers contribute to the slow pace of adopting surface transportation infrastructure
innovations.

Other major barriers are part of the research and technology innovation development
process itself. For example, the process of demonstrating and evaluating innovative
approaches and materials for transportation infrastructure (as well as for vehicles and
operations) is lengthy and expensive. Implementation may be greatly delayed, or even
aborted, by user concerns relating to life-cycle cost, long-term performance, safety, security
or other uncertainties normally associated with the innovation process. Overcoming these
barriers is critical to reaping the benefits of innovation.

Typically, changes in the methods, tools, and materials used in infrastructure construction
and maintenance come slowly. Factors inhibiting such change include: uncertainty as to
the costs and benefits of implementation, funding constraints or laws that preclude trading
reduced life-cycle costs for higher initial investments, a lack of familiarity with new
technologies and processes, questions of compatibility with current systems and workforce
skills, and institutional and regulatory barriers. These concerns discourage potential
vendors and suppliers from developing and marketing innovative products, because they
fear limited markets and low profits. In addition, the fragmented nature of the construction
industry poses a serious obstacle to realizing the potential advantages of new construction
materials, design tools, and concepts.

Consequently, credible trial use, evaluation, and demonstration of surface transportation
infrastructure innovations usually is necessary to spur the timely deployment of even the
most promising new technologies and techniques. This process must be comprehensive

3° In 1996, 400 firms were reported to specialize in the construction of highways and streets, and another 80
in constructing bridges and tunnels. The total assets of these firms were slightly more than $16 billion. The
top 15 firms in each group accounted for more than 50 percent of the total assets. Source: Ward Business
Directory of U.S. Private and Public Companies, 1996.

3! Smaller airports, which are not discussed at length in this document, often are privately owned.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 28


product as suitable for acquisition and use by public agencies. For example, AASHTO's
NTPEP and CERF's HITEC programs have established a standard nation-wide qualifying
procedure to try to circumvent the need for each of the highway and public works agencies
in various jurisdictions to qualify a new product for itself.

Pilot implementations and demonstrations are helpful to showcase “final” results and
implementation procedures to key members of the user community and to secure their
endorsement, which can pave the way for rapid adoption by others. Testimonial support by
leading users is a powerful force for change. Constructive comparisons of best practices
can promote adoption, because most agencies do not wish to be among the last to adopt a
widely accepted innovation. The key is getting a “critical mass” of user acceptance so that
adoption of the innovation will proceed on its own merits.

Support for making the transition to a new way of doing business is an important factor

contributing to success in adopting an innovation.” The “lead state” concept, in which a
state highway agency that implements an innovation serves as a peer counselor supporting
other states as they make the transition, can be highly effective in overcoming hesitancy on
the part of highway agencies at trying something that has yet to be proven in practice.
Training, such as that offered by the National Highway Institute, is recognized as a key
factor as well.“' Such activities foster peer-to-peer implementation support.

The systematic evaluation, documentation and dissemination of implementation results
often is neglected. However, capturing and reporting the benefits of innovations as they
are implemented is key to building momentum for more widespread deployment. Efforts

should be made to ensure that documentation of implementation results is developed and
made available to interested parties.

Incentives can facilitate the introduction of new technologies and innovative techniques b:
helping agencies to deal with the costs of implementation. In many instances, deciding to
“spend money now” to “save money over time” is a difficult proposition for agencies that
are under pressure to deliver near-term tangible results. In addition, there are costs
associated with adapting to the use of a new technology, such as deployment support and
training; these large up front investments can be major impediments to innovation. For
example, the use of Superpave requires laboratory procedures and facilities unlike those for
conventional pavement. Any agency that wants to experiment with Superpave must find a
way to cover the costs of acquiring the appropriate laboratory facilities, and of operating
that laboratory in parallel with other facilities. Federal assistance in covering these costs is
helpful in speeding the adoption of new technologies and techniques.

# NCHRP Report 382, Facilitating the Implementation of Research Findings: A Summary Report,
Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, 1996.

“a “Stewardship Report Documenting Benefits of Research and Technology Efforts,” Federal Highway
Administration, Report No. FHWA-SA-96-044, December 1995.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 43


Highways and Transit: Several sensor-based ITS applications are contributing to improved
roadway operations and routine maintenance. For example, a network of “smart
structures” — roadways, bridges, and tunnels embedded with sensors — may be
implemented to support Advanced Traveler Information Systems (ATIS). Such systems
provide the traveling public with real-time information on weather and road/railroad
conditions for specific locations so that they can make more informed transportation
choices.

A different application of these systems aids State DOTs. More than $2 billion is spent
annually on winter road and railroad maintenance in North America, including significant
wasted effort in anticipation of storms that fail to materialize. With better forecasts of
inclement weather, agencies have found that they can improve their productivity and
performance through more effective allocation of labor and equipment. Detailed
information about icing and wet conditions from sensors embedded in rights of way can be
used for assessing roadway and railroad conditions and dispatching plows, as well as for
guiding the appropriate application of sand, salt, and de-icing chemicals. This saves money
and reduces the infrastructure corrosion associated with these substances. The FHWA has
identified twenty-four sensor-related weather projects, including Road Weather Information
Systems (RWIS), in twenty-one States.'* Five States (North and South Dakota, Colorado,
Nevada and Washington) are developing statewide RWIS using both weather and roadway
sensors. Pavement sensor systems using infrared sensors are being developed for
maintenance trucks (Indiana and Vermont) as well as for embedded roadway condition
monitoring sensors (New York). Most of the remaining weather-related applications
monitor the impact of fog and storm conditions on driver visibility.

A number of existing weather and roadway information/monitoring systems use wireless
communications between sensors and remote processing units (RPUs), which transmit the
collected data to a central management site. The potential gains for infrastructure condition
monitoring using such systems are significant. In addition to reporting on surface
conditions, embedded sensors could be used to monitor the internal physical condition of
infrastructure components, facilitating the scheduling of maintenance and rehabilitation
efforts. To do this successfully, the sensor system must be integrated with a data collection,
processing, and analysis infrastructure, and combined with diagnostics and failure
prediction models. Because such systems would be costly and would require specially
trained staff to operate effectively, a benefit/cost calculation should be performed for each
potential installation. Investment analyses for these multi-purpose monitoring systems are
more likely to be most favorable for high-volume bridges and road segments in areas with
frequently dangerous weather conditions. However, anticipated savings in reduced
chemical usage and personnel overtime would quickly pay for these investments.

'8 Bileen Singleton, “Weather Synthesis Report,” prepared for the FHWA Weather Workshop, June 17-18,
1997, passim.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 16


process combines engineering principles with business practices and economics and
facilitates a logical approach to infrastructure decision-making.”

In addition to new sensors for monitoring infrastructure condition, technologies that have
Asset Management applications include Geographical Information Systems (GIS) and the
Global Positioning System (GPS). These allow data to be spatially referenced, stored, and
sorted to assess the overall conditions and operational performance along a specified route
between two points, not just for individual facilities along the way. The potential of these
various technologies is just beginning to be realized; it is important that R&T and technical
assistance efforts be provided to ensure that their capabilities are widely used. In addition,
R&T resources to support improved modeling tools and techniques for Asset Management
could begin to address this difficult infrastructure issue, both for individual modes and for
intermodal connections.

Federal R&T programs generally have not emphasized construction techniques for rapid
renewal. Hence, the development of time saving techniques has been left to the few large
private sector firms and projects that have the resources and incentives to devote to such
efforts. For example, innovative engineering and construction methods enabled the forty-
five year-old, two-lane George P. Coleman Bridge spanning the York River in Virginia to
be dismantled and replaced by a new four-lane, 1,145 meter structure with only nine days of
traffic disruption. Twenty-four days were allotted for bridge shutdown, with a penalty of
$8,000 per hour for any delay in restoring traffic, and a $4,000 per hour incentive for early
restoration. Virginia DOT was able to reduce the estimated $117 million cost of bridge
replacement by $34 million through reuse of existing caissons to support the new
superstructure. Even more important to bridge users, however, this minimized the time
commuters were faced with a fifty mile detour that added up to two hours to the trip
between Williamsburg and the Gloucester area.” This example demonstrates the time and
money savings possible from the use of rapid renewal techniques. Recognizing the
importance of faster construction, FHWA has made accelerated construction and
maintenance an R&T program priority.

Given the considerable traffic congestion in major metropolitan areas, the fact that traffic
patterns can change relatively rapidly, and the relatively fixed supply of infrastructure, more
Federal attention to rapid renewal techniques, materials, and design and construction
technologies appears to be warranted. New technology applications are being developed by
the private sector at an extraordinary rate. Advanced materials and techniques for rapid
construction also are likely to be developed by the private sector. However, without
sufficient technology transfer efforts, the benefits of these technologies for public sector

® US. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration and the American Association of
State Highway and Transportation Officials, Asset Management Advancing the State of the Art Into the 21st
Century Through Public-Private Dialogue, Publication No. FHWA-RTh97-046.

* “Barging in with the Best and the Brightest,” Consulting Engineer, Aug/Sep 1997, American Consulting
Engineers Council; “PB Notes,” Parsons Brinkerhoff, 1996; and “George P. Coleman Bridge Reconstruction
Project in Yorktown, VA,” The Construction Corner, Virginia Tech.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 46




A Technical Protocol guides the demonstration, testing, and evaluation process, and an
Evaluation Report provides details on the product/process performance under operational
field conditions, the practicality of construction or production, maintenance requirements,
safety aspects, and environmental characteristics. HITEC Highlights are published
quarterly to report on the status of ongoing evaluations.

The HITEC is a model partnership for successful and timely technology deployment, based
on an initial customer survey that identified barriers to innovation in highway materials and
construction technologies and tools. In its first year, more than 20 products were submitted
to HITEC for evaluation and endorsement. Application fees cover part of the costs of field
tests. To date, more than sixty evaluations of innovative infrastructure technologies are in
process, many of which involve advanced materials. Each completed evaluation results in
a brief Product Evaluation Bulletin, followed by a more complete Evaluation Report.
Among the products that have been tested are advanced bridge materials, including
composites, which are now being used in at least one bridge in twenty-one states. Other
successful evaluations include the composite column wrap for seismic bridge
reinforcement, a fiber reinforced polymer bridge retrofit system; a composite plastic marine
piling, impervious to corrosion; and a recyclable plastic stop sign with improved reflectivity
and night visibility. AASHTO has established a parallel testing effort specifically for its
members. This activity, the National Transportation Product Evaluation Program
(NTPEP), deals with new products for which accepted testing standards already exist.

ConMat: CERF’s ConMat program focuses on using advanced, high-performance
construction materials in new construction as well as in the repair, retrofit, and maintenance
of existing facilities. Membership and potential collaboration is open to all members of the
design and construction community, including designers, fabricators, equipment
manufacturers, material suppliers, architects, contractors, and owners. ConMat’s Smart
Materials Working Group concentrates on accelerating the commercialization of “smart”
materials and monitoring devices, including fiber-optic, strain gauges, piezoelectric and
chemical sensors, and ultraflat antennae, micro-electromechanical devices, and
microsensors.

CERF recently established additional Technology Evaluation Centers to evaluate public
works innovations and environmental technologies. In addition, CERF plans to launch a
new public-private partnership, the Partnership for the Advancement of Infrastructure and
its Renewal (PAIR).

Cargo Handling Cooperative Program (CHCP)

Other types of Federal partnership aim to implement advanced technologies to streamline
Federal maritime regulatory functions and safety and rescue operations for the coastal
waterways. For one maritime-related, Federal/private partnership, the goal is to facilitate
commercial vessel operations. The CHCP is a partnership designed to foster research and
technology development by U.S.-flag carriers. An executive committee composed of

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 35


University Transportation Centers Program (UTCP), and University-Based
Consortia and Cooperative Research Programs

Since 1987, the U.S. DOT has been investing in the University Transportation Centers
Program (UTCP), a network of ten regional university-based research consortia. This
program is co-funded by the FHWA and the FTA, with program management provided by
the RSPA. The 1998 TEA 21 legislation authorizes $192 million for university
transportation research over the next six fiscal years. Each UTC is a consortium of six to
twelve universities with a research and education focus based on regional transportation
needs. Matching funds are provided by States and local transportation authorities and by
industry. At least five percent of UTC funds are dedicated to outreach and technology
transfer activities.

Under ISTEA, three National Centers and five University Research Institutes (URI) were
established. One example is the Infrastructure Technology Institute (ITI) at Northwestern
University, which receives funding of $3 million annually; the Center focuses on
infrastructure advanced materials research and applications.°° It operates a national
information clearinghouse for technical resources related to infrastructure renewal materials
and technologies. Faculty, students, corporate, and State partners also perform research and
demonstrations in key technical areas, and cooperate with the Center for Advanced
Cement-based Materials (ACBM), also located at Northwestern. The National Science
Foundation (NSF), NIST, FHWA, and companies in the concrete and ceramics industries
fund the ABCM. Ongoing projects include non-destructive infrastructure test and
evaluation (NDT/NDE), advanced coatings to prevent corrosion, and a high-strength
weldable steel.

Airport Pavement Programs

In addition to the FAA’s Airport Pavement Technology Program (discussed in Chapter 2),
significant contributions to airport pavement research and technology come from the FAA’s
Center of Excellence for Airport Pavement Research. In 1995, the FAA designated the
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC) as a Center of Excellence (COE) in
Airport Pavement Research. This COE, which also includes Northwestern University, was
established to conduct basic research in the area of airport pavement technology. Currently,
the COE is conducting 13 research activities, ranging from the development of “High
Performance Concrete for Airport Pavements” to “Mechanistic-Based Airport Pavement
Design Concepts/Procedures.”

%6 See the ITI Internet home page at http://www. iti.acns.nwu.edu.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 33


Chapter 1 of this report summarizes the current condition and performance of the major
sectors of the Nation’s surface transportation system. A complete listing of acronyms used
in this report is provided in Appendix A. Chapter 2 categorizes the technologies that are
likely to improve transport system infrastructure functions and describes DOT programs
supporting them. Chapter 3 introduces the major programs designed to facilitate
development and dissemination of technology applications to those organizations with
responsibility for surface transport physical infrastructure. Chapter 4 offers some
observations on programs for facilitating technology transfer, and criteria for success.
Finally, Chapter 5 presents findings and conclusions. Research for this report included a
review of recent literature and interviews with the developers and users of infrastructure
technologies, from both the public and private sectors.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 3


Promising Technologies and Applications

In 1997 the TRB released its report, “Developing Long Lasting, Lower Maintenance
Highway Pavement Research, Research Needs (FHWA).” This study was conducted to
determine the technological feasibility of constructing pavement that will last up to 50 years
without the need for major rehabilitation; to identify the research needs associated with
long-lived, lower maintenance pavement; and to describe the issues associated with the use
of more durable pavement.

Efforts such as this TRB report point to ways technologies can help to allocate resources
and to make other infrastructure system challenges more manageable. However, the results
of such activities can be even more widely useful if they take into account the needs and
circumstances of other related parts of the transportation infrastructure, including other
modes and even other applications of the same materials or process under review. Many
technology categories show promise for use in the monitoring, maintenance, and rapid
renewal of all types of surface transportation infrastructure, including intermodal facilities.
These include the following:

Many types of sensing, positioning, computer, and communications technologies;
Advanced materials;

Nondestructive testing and tools;

Rapid construction methods; and

Advanced modeling tools and cost models to assist in setting maintenance and
management priorities.

Sensing, locating, computer, and communications technologies already play a key role in
many current modal R&T programs, although most of these are focused on improving
operational safety and efficiency. However, the same technologies, with some adaptations,
could support infrastructure monitoring to forecast and predict problems, gauge incipient
failures, and facilitate condition-based, “just-in-time” renewal.

Many surface transportation agencies already have established systems for managing
segments of their physical infrastructure, particularly pavement and bridges; one example is
the FHWA's bridge management system (BMS). These systems help target budgetary
resources so as to realize the maximum benefit from infrastructure improvements.
However, each system addresses a segment of the surface transportation infrastructure
separately, and cannot by itself provide an overview of the condition and needs of all
facilities that must be managed. A technique relatively new to surface transportation, Asset
Management, will provide a systematic process of maintaining, upgrading, and operating
physical assets in a cost-effective manner, and shows great promise for improving the
monitoring, maintenance, and rapid renewal of surface transportation infrastructure. The

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 45


TWG
UIUC
URI
USCG
UTCP

Technical Working Group
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

University Research Institute
United States Coast Guard
University Transportation Centers Program

Vessel Traffic Services

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT

A3


Percentage of Mlles

Poor Mediocre Fair Good Very Good

Figure 2. Pavement Condition of U.S. Highways

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1997 Condition and Performance, p. 26.

unctional
Structural

Percentage of Total

0%
Interstate Other Arterial Collector

Highway Class

Figure 3. Deficient Bridges in the National Inventory (1996)

Source: U.S. Department of Transportation, 1997 Condition and Performance, pp. 28-29.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 5


Technical Report Documentation Page

4. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient's Catalog No.

porn WU

PB99-160574

4, Title and Subtitle a eee nes nntemen se ate 5. Report Date
SURFACE TRANSPORTATION: RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY

ASSESSMENT

6. Performing Organizational Code

8. Performing Organization Report No.
7. Author(s)
9. Performing Organization Name and Address 410. Work Unit No. (TRAIS)

U. S. Department of Transportation

Research and Special Programs Administration

Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 11. Contract or Grant No.

Kendall Square
Cambridge, MA 02142 13. Type of Report and Period Covered
12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address May 1999

National Science and Technology Council
Executive Office of the President
Washington, DC

14. Sponsoring Agency Code
DOT/RSPA

45. Supplementary Notes. .
Released in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Transportation's Technology Sharing Program

16. Abstract

This report focuses on the role of the U.S. Department of Transportation as a partner in national interagency R&D and technology
application efforts relating to advanced materials and technologies for improved infrastructure maintenance, rehabilitation, and
renewal. An opening section summarizes the current condition and performance of major sectors in the Nation's surface transportation
system. The report then categorizes technologies that are likely to improve transport system infrastructure functions and describes
DOT Programs which supports them. Major programs are introduced which are designed to facilitate development and dissemination
of technology applications to those organizations. Observations on programs which facilitate technology transfer are offered in
conclusion. Research for this report included a review of recent literature and interviews with the developers and users of infrastructure
technologies, from both the public and private sectors.

17. Key Words 18. Distribution Statement

surface transportation; technology; infrastructure Availability is unlimited. Document is being released for
sale to the U.S. public through the National Technical
Information Service, Springfield, Virginia 22161

19. Security Classif. (of this report) 20. Security Classif. (of this page) 21. No. of Pages 22. Price

Unclassified Unclassified

64

Form DOT F 1700.7 (8-72) | Per FORMPRO/Delrina 04/04/94 Reproduction of completed page authorized


techniques, and impact prediction tools are needed to keep pace with advances in sensors,
communications, and information systems that are enabling “real-time” monitoring.
Researchers already are using fiber optic sensors in decks and along beams to monitor
deflections remotely and to calculate strain on bridges throughout the day via telephone and
Internet data links. As the costs of these systems decrease, the financial burden associated
with gathering and analyzing the necessary data for advanced management systems will be
reduced.

Finally, funding for infrastructure preservation R&T programs is less than ten percent of all
DOT R&T funding. Estimating the depreciated value of the surface transportation physical
infrastructure and the savings associated with widespread implementation of technology
innovations, however, is difficult. Some transportation infrastructure experts have
attempted to do this. For example, the Transportation Research Board (TRB) has estimated
that an improvement of only one percent in the durability and performance of pavement,
asphalt materials, coatings, and structural elements for the Nation’s highways and bridges
would generate savings of $10 to $30 billion over 20 years.”* In addition, the Civil
Engineering Research Foundation (CERF) estimated that life-cycle cost savings gained
from using advanced concrete and asphalt in highway pavements would offset higher front-
end costs by more than a factor of six. At the current lane-mile replacement rate, the
Nation’s annual savings on materials alone could total approximately $500 million, as a
result of increased service life as well as reduced maintenance and travel delay costs.” In
other words, experts hold that advances in technology, once they are widely applied, can
save taxpayers billions of dollars over time.

baad Transportation Research Board
> Civil Engineering Research Foundation

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 26


A cross-modal array of DOT and selected other Federal R&T programs were reviewed to
identify technologies that were developed with their assistance and that potentially could
address monitoring, maintaining, and renewal for surface transport infrastructure. The
review focused on sensing, computer, and telecommunications technologies; advanced
rapid construction methods; advanced materials; computer-based planning, modeling, and
asset management tools; data systems; and non-destructive testing techniques. The
underlying premise is that innovations in these areas would provide a solid basis for
advancing the state-of-the-practice for infrastructure preservation and renewal to realize
cost and durability advantages. For example, computer modeling and planning tools could
analyze proposed changes in road and railroad connecting infrastructure to ensure that they
will be able to handle future increases in intermodal container movements at international
ports. Sensing, telecommunications, and computer technologies already in place for
highway traffic management could be used for condition monitoring, thereby enabling cost-
effective scheduling of maintenance and reconstruction.

Research and Technology Context

The review revealed that surface transportation research sponsored by U.S. DOT modal
agencies addresses priority problems in accordance with each agency’s official mission and
the concerns of its respective constituents. The R&T problems addressed, indeed the
majority of DOT R&T agendas, focus overwhelmingly on safe and efficient operations for
all modes. FHWA, which in recent years has received about one-half of the Department's
R&D funding, is the only DOT branch that has devoted substantial research resources to
stewardship of the physical transportation surface infrastructure. FHWA supports research
into durable materials that require less maintenance; non-destructive bridge and pavement
evaluation technologies; and data collection and analysis from which preferred pavement
maintenance and rehabilitation strategies can be derived. These items are critical to state
Departments of Transportation, FHWA’s constituents, which have primary responsibility
for building and managing most of the interstate and other major national highway systems.
The FHWA also promotes the development and implementation of bridge management
systems (BMS) to assist in making cost-effective bridge replacement, maintenance, and
rehabilitation decisions. About one-third of FHWA’s total R&T budget, amounting to
$77.2 million in FY 1998, is devoted to infrastructure preservation and renewal. (For a
detailed breakout of FHWA’s programs and funding support for that year, see Appendix B.)

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 14


About the National Science and Technology Council

President Clinton established the National Science and Technology Council (NSTC) by
Executive Order on November 23, 1993. This cabinet-level council is the principal means for the
President to coordinate science, space, and technology policies across the Federal Government.
NSTC acts as a “virtual” agency for science and technology (S&T). The President chairs the
NSTC. Membership consists of the Vice President, Assistant to the President for Science and
Technology, Cabinet Secretaries and Agency Heads with significant science and technology
responsibilities, and other White House officials.

Through the NSTC, Federal departments and agencies work cooperatively to ensure that Federal
science and technology investments support national goals. NSTC Committees prepare R&D
strategies that are coordinated across the Federal government to form a comprehensive
investment package.

Call 202-456-6100 to obtain additional information regarding the NSTC.

Prepared by

United States Department of Transportation
Research and Special Programs Administration
John A. Volpe National Transportation Systems Center
Transportation Strategic Planning and Analysis Office
55 Broadway
Cambridge, Massachusetts 02142-1093



Table 2.

Surface Transportation R&T Assessment
DOT Technology Innovation Programs

Program

Transportation
Mode _

Infrastructure Focus /
Objecti

Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS)

Highway / Transit

Py

Safety FHWA/JPO, FTA,
Efficiency
ITS-IDEA (Innovations Deserving Highway / Transit / Safety TRB,
Exploratory Analysis) Railroad Efficiency FHWA/JPO, FRA,
FTA, NHTSA
Cargo Handling Cooperative Program Maritime Efficiency MARAD
(CHCP)
Ship Operations Cooperative Program Maritime Efficiency MARAD
(SOCP)
Vessel Traffic Services (VTS) Maritime Efficiency USCG
Positive Train Control (PTC) Railroad Safety FRA
Highway-Rail Grade Crossing Research _| Railroad / Highway Safety FRA
Transit - IDEA (Innovations Deserving Transit Efficiency TRB, FTA
Exploratory Analysis)
Transit Cooperative Research Program Transit Efficiency TRB, FTA
(TCRP)
Airport Surface Traction Research Airport Safety FAA

ipo logy Progra irport Mot ing & FAA
Maintenance
Pavement and Airport Runway Program | Airport Monitoring & Army Corps of
Maintenance Engineers
LTPP — Long Term Pavement Highway Monitoring TRB, FHWA
Performance Program
National Cooperative Highway Research | Highway Monitoring, Maintenance | TRB, FHWA
Program (NCHRP) & Rapid Renewal
NCHRP - IDEA (Innovations Deserving | Highway Monitoring, Maintenance | TRB
Exploratory Analysis) & Rapid Renewal
FHWA Contract Research Program Highwa‘ Rapid Renewal FHWA
gee
Strategic Highway Research Program Highway Lead State, Training, and | FHWA
(SHRP) Implementation Incentives
Local Transportation Assistance Highway Information and Training | FHWA
Program (LTAP)
National Transportation Product Highway COTS Evaluation / AASHTO
Evaluation Program (NTPEP) Certification
HITEC — Highway Innovative Highway Evaluation / Certification | CERF, FHWA
Technology Evaluation Center
National Highway Institute Highway Training FHWA

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 38


Additional and focused cooperative research with industry could lead to faster, more
efficient construction and rapid infrastructure renewal. Opportunities in this area where
industry already is leading the way include construction traffic control technology,
computerized construction management and scheduling, trenchless excavation, and laser-
guided construction vehicles.

FHWA Contract Research Program

The thrust of this research program is to promote the evolution of the highway community
from state-of-the-practice to state-of-the-art. The long-term research projects authorized by
Section 6001 of ISTEA focused on innovative, cutting-edge emerging technologies with
promise for infrastructure renewal and preservation.” Work is underway on technologies
such as robotics for highway inspection; high-performance materials for pavements;
coatings, adhesives and structures; use of waste and recyclable materials for highway
construction; and decision-analysis tools. This program also funds cooperative efforts with
other agencies, including the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), the
National Science Foundation, the Army Corps of Engineers; and with industry (see
discussion of partnerships in Chapter 3) to enable early application of new technologies.
Both national and international technology transfer activities are included in this initiative.

For example, the FHWA is working with the NIST to improve the understanding of the
relationship between acoustic emission (AE) signals and micro-cracking of structural steel.
This effort included the development of a high-fidelity broad band AE sensor and a high-
capacity digital wave form recorder. Computer imaging techniques are used to display and
study the actual micro-fracture process and reconstruct the bridge steel fracture history. AE
records then are correlated with micro-structural fracture data to determine characteristic
signatures for distinct types of fractures.

Efficient and effective maintenance and repair of roadways and bridges requires timely and
accurate data collection and evaluation. In the past, collecting such data has been
expensive, time-consuming and labor-intensive. In addition, inconsistent inspection posed
significant problems in developing reliable test results. Consequently, the FHWA has
targeted the development of new non-destructive evaluation (NDE) technologies as a major
highway research priority. These technologies can scan a structure, highway lane, or
bridge; record data; and store or transmit the results for expert analysis. NDE technologies
that are being developed or tested include the following:

Eddy current crack detection;

Forced diffusion thermography crack detection;

Radar imaging of bridge decks;

Wireless data acquisition for bridge load rating;

Remote deflection measurements for bridge load rating; and
Acoustic strain gauges for bridge load rating.

5 Section 502 of TEA 21 also authorizes a similar “Advanced Research Program”.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 22


comprehensive evaluation of SHRP benefits recently was conducted under the auspices of
the FHWA. The “lessons learned” from SHRP are summarized in special issues of TR
News detailing the benefits of applied transportation research from the perspectives of the
States and of the Federal government.

Long-Term Pavement Performance Program (LTPP)

The Long-Term Pavement Performance (LTPP) Program was initiated under the SHRP
umbrella. The LTPP is a 20-year study of in-service pavement to assess the value of
innovative designs, pavement structures, materials, and methods of maintenance and
rehabilitation for a broad range of climatic, environmental, soil, maintenance, and loading
stress conditions. The program’s ultimate goal is to increase pavement service life by
applying the results of these efforts. The LTPP is a partnership involving the FHWA,
AASHTO, and TRB; and State and Canadian Provincial DOTs, with industry and academic
participation. More than fifteen other Nations also are participating in the program by
managing complementary studies. The LTPP is managed by the FHWA with oversight
provided by the Research and Technology Executive Board (RTEB), and external advice
and comment provided by the TRB’s LTPP Committee. Under TEA 21, it is funded at an
annual level of about $16 million. About 85 percent of the funds are allocated to data
collection and technical operations support for LTPP and to limited SHRP follow-on field
studies; the remainder (approximately 15 percent) is allocated to data analysis.

The LTPP is the largest pavement performance research project ever undertaken. The
database developed through this program eventually will include twenty years of
performance data based on periodic data collection and condition monitoring of
approximately 2,800 in-service pavement test sections located throughout the United States
and Canada. Data analyses focus on three time periods: near-term (three to five years),
mid-term (five to ten years), and long-term (ten to twenty years). Different data products
are dynamically integrated into AASHTO guides for material mixes, design and test
specifications, and construction and maintenance methods modifications. Most
importantly, performance models are developed and refined to generate predictions that are
tailored to local environmental and use conditions.

Efforts are underway to develop testing protocols for Portland cement concrete bond
strength, thermal coefficient of expansion, and creep compliance testing for asphalt
mixtures. LTPP research efforts have included developing a non-destructive testing
procedure to quantify layer thickness; a localized expert system for rating preventive
maintenance treatments; guidelines for preventive maintenance treatments; and

a technical assessment of the adequacy of existing procedures for the design of new and
rehabilitated pavements.

35 Issues 188 (January-February 1997), 189 (March-April, 1997); and 190 (May-June 1997), respectively.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 31


Transportation and law enforcement agencies at the State and local levels, as well as the
railroad industry, have relied for decades on a variety of telecommunications systems to
support their operations and maintenance activities. These include both wireline (primarily
telephone) and wireless systems, such as fixed base and mobile radio communications. The
rapid evolution of information systems and telecommunications technologies in recent
years, however, has significantly expanded both the quality and quantity of the available
options. Many organizations are using these new, inexpensive, and reliable
telecommunications services to enhance their effectiveness. Wireless communications and
EDI protocols also are used to expedite intermodal cargo movements among ships, railroad
freight cars, and trucks. Before automated systems were available, when cargo tracking
was done manually, it often took the drayage carrier hours to pick up or drop off a load.
Now that automated systems are available, the movement may be completed in fifteen
minutes. The U.S. Customs Service has made such automated bill of lading and cargo
tracking systems available to commercial users since 1993.

One of the most dramatic new trends is the use of complex, high-volume wireline networks
for voice, video, and data transmission. With the introduction of cable and fiber optics to
supplement the traditional copper wire configuration, the amount of data that can be carried
on such a network has increased exponentially. Many jurisdictions are implementing their
own long-distance wireline communications networks for public purposes, but the potential
of these new technologies for infrastructure monitoring has not yet been tapped. Indeed, as
shown in Box 1, many state networks were put in place for purposes other than
transportation.

Rail: The FRA sponsors operational safety research that uses sensing and communication
technologies. Railroad track inspection using automated inspection cars has enabled
railroads to store track-related data in an active database to monitor track performance and
quantify changes in track conditions between surveys. Global Positioning Systems (GPS)
are used to transmit data for both analysis and control. Elements of the track defect
detection program include the following:

e Automated Track Inspection Program (ATIP) - The FRA has developed a high-speed
track geometry vehicle to detect track defects and non-uniformities due to train speeds,
tonnage, weather, geographic conditions, and normal wear and tear. The FRA’s Office
of Safety operates the Track Geometry Survey Vehicle (T-10), which uses advanced
electronic sensing and data processing, to obtain track measurements to be used to
monitor compliance with the Federal Track Safety Standards (FTSS).

e Gage Restraint Management System (GRMS) - This system, developed for the FRA by
the Volpe National Transportation Systems Center in partnership with the railroad
industry, is an automated technology that measures the ability of track to maintain the
proper distance between two rails under a variety of service load conditions.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 17


Introduction

As the turn of the Century approaches, the United States is at the end of almost fifty years
of building and expanding its surface transportation infrastructure, particularly the national
highway system. During those years, older elements of the infrastructure such as the rail
system and port connections have been pruned and reshaped. Much of this surface
infrastructure, even those segments that were built or modernized relatively recently, has
aged, with significant portions nearing (indeed, often exceeding) their original design lives.
Thus, the infrastructure requires regular maintenance and extensive renewal to ensure
preservation of the level of service that enables the Nation to meet its strategic goals of
safety, mobility, and economic competitiveness. Simultaneously, freight volumes and
passenger travel over the surface network have grown steadily, spurred by brisk domestic
and international trade, a healthy economy, and logistics technologies that have made travel
and shipping more efficient. This trend is projected to continue.

Much of the Nation’s far-flung transportation network (see Figure 1) is aging and costly to
maintain, and suffers periodic service disruptions for repairs or reconstruction. Since
businesses today depend on just-in-time deliveries to keep inventory costs low, surface
artery closures for maintenance or reconstruction cause costly delays in meeting tight

Surface
e Highways and roads 3.9 million miles
e Highway Bridges 581,862
« — Airports 5,400 public use, including 29 large hubs
e Intercity rail 170,000 miles
© =~ Urban rapid rail 9,582 miles
Linking
e Petroleum and natural gas pipelines 190,000 miles
e¢ Navigable waterways 26,000 miles
¢ 600 ports, and 10,000 waterfront facilities
(82 percent privately owned)

Figure 1. The U.S. Transportation Infrastructure, 1995

Source: Condition and Performance: 1997, Status of the Nation’s Surface Transportation
System, Report to Congress, U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway
Administration and Federal Transit Administration, p. 7; and Transportation Statistics
Annual Report 1997, U.S. Department of Transportation, Bureau of Transportation
Statistics, pp. 4-5.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 1


Estimate of R&T Funding of Physical Infrastructure

Appendix B

Maintenance, Monitoring, and Renewal

FY 1998!
R&T Program Total for Program Amount for Infrastructure
Maintenance, Monitoring, and Renewal
Highway R&D? $61,087,000 | Pavements $10,500,000
Structures $15,256,000
Technology Assessment & $13,311,000 | Roadway $1,080,000
Deployment? Applications
Structures & $2,383,000
Soils
Technology Implementation $11,000,000 $4,290,000
Partnerships*
Long Term Pavement $15,000,000 $15,000,000
Performance
National Technology $56,000,000 $21,840,000
Deployment Initiative*
ITS R&D® $31,500,000 $0
Nut $8,000,000 $3,120,000
Advanced Research* $1,000,000 $390,000
National Advanced Driver $13,250,000 $0
Simulator
International* $900,000 $351,000
GPS Oversight $1,000,000 $0
R&T Technical Support $10,000,000 $0
Totals $222,048,000 $74,210,000

Source: Federal Highway Administration, Office of Associate Administrator for Research and Development, March

1998,

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT —B-!



Chapter 4

Progress Made under ISTEA and Lessons Learned

Under ISTEA, support was provided to a number of programs for which the goal was to
deploy and implement innovations in technologies and materials. This Chapter discusses
some of the lessons learned from these programs, identifies which of the Technology
Innovation programs have been reasonably successful in achieving their goals, and reviews
the reasons for this success.

Modal Programs

Highways: ISTEA included provisions directed at developing and introducing innovative
methods and technologies for highway infrastructure monitoring, maintenance, and rapid
renewal. Notably, this legislation provided more than $100 million for the explicit purpose
of fostering the implementation of R&D products. However, at the outset, it must be
acknowledged that measuring the impacts of Federally-funded highway research and
implementation programs is difficult. In addition to the inherent difficulty of isolating
program effects from external influences, few means exist to collect the necessary data. To
assist in evaluating the effectiveness of Federally funded highway research, interviews were
conducted with a small sample of highway agency representatives and research and
program administrators. Their insights provide one measure of effectiveness.

One study has found that the rate of adoption of innovations by State highway agencies has
improved recently.°* However, the results of the interviews suggest that the overall rate of
innovation in highway agencies has not changed enough to make a significant improvement
in infrastructure preservation processes or costs in the near term. Moreover, most
interviewees did not anticipate a significant acceleration in innovation, given the
decentralized control over the nation’s highways by numerous independent agencies and
organizations. Most of the interviewees believe that because of such fragmentation,
research and technology implementation provisions should be an integral part of any major
Federal surface transportation research initiative. They also believe that facilitating
innovation is an important national role that extends beyond the research and technology
products associated with DOT programs.

® One survey of state highway agencies indicates that innovation was accelerated by 3.5 years on average
over a ten-year period. Facilitating the Implementation of Research Findings: A Summary Report, National
Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) Report 382, Transportation Research Board, National
Academy Press, 1996.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 39


transit services from a market standpoint and to treat the transit user as a
customer.”

Most representative of this change is the application of advanced traffic management and
travel information systems to public transit operations in both urban and suburban areas.
Innovative partnerships among public agencies and the private sector are resulting in major
investments in intelligent transportation, ranging from research and development and
operational tests to real-world deployment. Understandably, transit agencies are most
interested in technologies that improve operations and save costs. From that perspective,
ITS technologies are more attractive than infrastructure monitoring and renewal.

Rail: New technologies and track materials have allowed railroads to improve their track
performance. Freight railroads and Amtrak have upgraded their tracks, replacing them with
stronger rails and improving the track ties. Multi-year research results of the jointly funded
FRA/railroad industry Heavy Axle Load testing program at the Facility for Accelerated
Service Testing (FAST) at Pueblo, Colorado, have shown that modern rails made of cleaner
premium steels have a longer fatigue life: up to five or ten times longer than rails made of
conventional steels. In addition, given the recent trend towards track reduction, railroads
will be able to concentrate their capital investments on improving the maintenance of their
remaining tracks and signal systems.

Emerging maintenance methods and technologies have the potential to reduce maintenance
costs and enhance safety for the railroad industry. The defect detection methods, for
instance, could have predictive or even prescriptive capabilities. Maintenance worker
productivity has improved as advanced maintenance technologies, including better track
defect detection technologies, are implemented, and better scheduling techniques are used.
In addition, recent increased use of lubricants has led to significant reductions in rail wear,
while automated and mechanized maintenance allows for better control of surface
geometry. These reduce overall wheel and rail forces and the resulting track degradation.

Ports: Advanced technologies have the potential to improve port infrastructure
maintenance and rehabilitation, which would increase the capacity, safety, and cost-
effectiveness of the U.S. port system. Significant opportunities exist for improving
infrastructure capacity and throughput through the joint-use of military facilities and
promotion of dual-use technologies. The ongoing defense conversion programs offer the
potential for improving the capacity and throughput of the existing port infrastructure.
Given cost issues and environmental restrictions on physical capacity expansion, more joint
civilian use of military facilities and diffusion of dual-use technologies could be cost-
effective approaches to increasing capacity. Notable among current efforts are the U.S.
TRANSCOM initiatives to leverage commercial technologies, streamline landside lift

® “Public Transit — Searching for New Paradigms.” Innovation Briefs. Urban Mobility Corporation, Vol. 8,
No.7, Sep/Oct 1997.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 4l


Chapter 1

Surface Transportation System Baseline Condition and
Performance

The well being and vitality of the surface transportation infrastructure are essential to the
safety, mobility, and economic prosperity of the Nation. In direct expenditures alone,
transportation-related activities account for about 11 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic
Product. The underpinnings for these activities, transportation infrastructure systems, must
be restored, renewed, preserved, and strengthened on a regular basis while they continue to
serve the ever-growing and changing transportation needs of our Nation. To assess the role
that technological innovations could play in making stewardship of the surface
infrastructure system more efficient and cost-effective, potential applications of new
technology must be evaluated against a system condition and performance baseline. This
chapter reviews the condition and performance issues related to surface transportation
infrastructure maintenance and renewal specific to roads, railroads, and transit, and the
related links to airports and ports and waterways. Although the focus of this report is a
systems look at surface transportation R&T programs, transportation statistics and research
agendas are developed, managed, and published modally. Therefore, modal descriptions
and information are necessary, with a return to a systems perspective as appropriate and
useful.

Roads and Bridges

According to the FHWA, the average condition of pavement continues to improve.
However, more than six percent of all pavement is in need of immediate repair; an
additional thirteen percent will require attention within five years to avoid being rated in
poor condition (see Figure 2).

While the condition of the nation's bridges also continues to improve, approximately 27
percent, or about 93,000, bridges are classified as deficient. Functional deficiencies, such
as being too narrow, are slightly more prevalent than structural deficiencies, such as design
load limitations (see Figure 3).

The Federal Highway Administration estimates that maintaining current physical conditions
on existing roadways and bridges without raising costs to the users of the system would
require an investment of about $29 billion annually: $23.5 billion for highways and $5.6
billion for bridges. Capacity-related improvements to keep congestion near current levels
call for another $17 billion annually.” In 1995, only about $17.5 billion of the $35 billion
in total capital expenditures on public roadway infrastructure (excluding local roads

2 U.S. Department of Transportation, 1997 Condition and Performance, p. 55.

SURFACE TRANSPORTATION RESEARCH AND TECHNOLOGY ASSESSMENT 4