Transportation Asset Management Case Studies

COMPREHENSIVE TRANSPORTATION ASSET MANAGEMENT

The North Carolina Experience, Part One

Presented by
Cape Hatteras Lighthouse.

FRONT COVER PHOTO:

The Reedy Creek Bridge at night.
Note From the Associate Administrator

With factors such as an aging national infrastructure, 

increasing congestion and limited funds weighing heavily 

on transportation agencies, State departments of transportation (DOTs) are looking for innovative ways to manage their transportation dollars.

One tool that is providing great benefits is Transportation Asset Management (TAM), a strategic approach that 

strives to provide the best return for each dollar invested 

by maximizing system performance, improving customer 

satisfaction and minimizing life-cycle costs.

TAM endeavors vary from State to State and include 

efforts in the areas of data integration, economics in 

asset management, the utilization of Highway Economic 

Requirements System – State Version (HERS-ST), life-cycle 

cost analysis (LCCA), preservation, and pavement and 

bridge management, among others.

Because each State’s experience is unique – and because 

FHWA believes that transportation agencies work more 

efficiently when information on one another’s successes is 

shared – the Office of Asset Management is continuing its 

series of TAM case study reports begun in 2002.

On behalf of the Office of Asset Management, I am 

pleased to add this case study on a comprehensive TAM 

effort to the series. I believe that each of the five case 

studies generated this year (one on LCCA, two on HERS-ST 

and two on comprehensive TAM efforts) will help transportation agencies meet the increasingly complex challenges facing them today.

King W. Gee 

Associate Administrator for Infrastructure 

February 2007
Note to the Reader

The TAM case study series is the result of partnering between 

State departments of transportation and the Federal Highway Administration’s (FHWA’s) Office of Asset Management. 

FHWA provides the forum, and the States furnish the details 

of their experiences with asset management.

For each case study, FHWA representatives interview State 

transportation staff and compile the information, and the 

State approves the resulting material. Thus, the case study 

reports rely on the agencies’ own assessment of their experience. Readers should note that the reported results may not 

be reproducible in other organizations. ■

An HOV lane on I-77.


Executive Summary 

Once considered a rural State, North Carolina now boasts 

an estimated population of 8,683,242 individuals, with 7 

million licensed drivers and more than 7.5 million registered 

vehicles.

Managing complex transportation demands in the areas 

of highways, aviation, ferry, public transit and rail requires 

out-of-the-box thinking, especially in light of the State’s 

burgeoning population, increasing maintenance needs and 

limited transportation dollars.

North Carolina has addressed these concerns by becoming a leader in the transportation field. In 1998, the North 

Carolina Department of Transportation (NCDOT) stepped up 

its asset management efforts by developing a maintenance 

quality assurance program to report its maintenance needs to 

the North Carolina General Assembly. The department also 

began a pavement preservation initiative in 2001 that develops system preservation strategies based on the maintenance 

condition report.

In 2000, the DOT embarked upon an effort to develop 

a visionary document that would identify the State’s long 

term transportation needs. A multimodal steering committee 

spearheaded the endeavor, which included 1) an 18-month 

scoping process to determine potential funding and needs for 

all modes of transportation, and 2) a 30-month public education, solicitation and dialogue process regarding transportation priorities. The result? NCDOT’s Board of Transportation 

unanimously adopted the Long Range Statewide Transportation Plan, the agency’s first real blueprint for the next 25 

years, in September 2004.

During the development of the long range plan, NCDOT’s 

Division of Highways recognized the need to establish a clear 

direction for the department and set up workgroups tasked 

with developing performance based measures for each core 

business area of the DOT. Each workgroup was assigned the 

task of developing a plan for their respective area based on 

the department’s asset management philosophies and the 

long range plan. The DOT is in the process of rolling out 

those measures, and it continues to develop management 

systems in pavement and traffic signal maintenance that will 

be used in concert with its overall maintenance, bridge and 

geographic information systems. NCDOT’s next steps include 

an update of the Long Range Statewide Transportation Plan 

and the development of an implementation strategy that 

addresses the needs and findings of the plan. ■


Agency Facts

Established as the State Highway Commission in 1915, NCDOT has 

undergone several reorganizations over the years.

Via legislative statute, the DOT assumed maintenance of the county 

road system in 1932. The next major change came in 1941, when the 

General Assembly consolidated services previously provided by the Secretary of State and the Department of Revenue, creating the Department 

of Motor Vehicles. The Executive Organization Act of 1971 combined 

the State Highway Commission and the Department of Motor Vehicles 

to form the North Carolina Department of Transportation and Highway 

Safety. In 1979, “Highway Safety” was dropped from the department’s 

name when the Highway Patrol Division was transferred to the newly created Department of Crime Control and Public Safety, and NCDOT as 

we know it today was formed.

NCDOT has the second largest State-maintained highway system in 

the Nation, with jurisdiction over 79,009 of the State’s 103,104 centerline 

roadway miles. In addition, NCDOT maintains 17,848 of the State’s 

18,540 structures. Of these, 14,030 are bridges and 4,510 are culverts.

The State keeps travelers abreast of current conditions via a statewide 

511 traveler information system and an intelligent transportation system 

(ITS) that includes over 140 dynamic message signs, 200 traffic cameras, 

three transportation management centers, 500 centerline miles of Interstate Motorist Assistance Patrol (IMAP) and 8,800 traffic signals, as well 

as a web-based Traveler Information Management System (TIMS) that 

provides the user with real-time incident and congestion information.

The department’s planning, project development and design activities 

are centralized in DOT headquarters in Raleigh; operations, construction 

and maintenance activities are housed within 14 division offices, 41 district offices and 100 county maintenance facilities across the State. The 

13,991-employee department operates under the Secretary of Transportation and a 19-member Board of Transportation. The State’s 17 metropolitan planning organizations (MPOs) and 20 regional planning organizations (RPOs) play a key role in transportation planning efforts.

NCDOT’s mission is to “provide and support a safe and integrated 

transportation system that enhances the State.” It has demonstrated its 

commitment to this mission by 1) working to eliminate the highway 

maintenance backlog and reduce congestion while protecting and improv-




ing the State’s natural resources, and 2) working to develop and improve 

the State’s infrastructure through maximization of existing resources and 

continual process improvement. TAM has played a vital role in this 

effort.

An NCDOT crew crack-sealing a road.


SETTING THE STAGE

What Did North Carolina Have?

Throughout much of its history, NCDOT has committed a large portion 

of its transportation dollars (as much as 50 percent) to new construction 

and capacity expansion projects, an approach that served the State well as 

its population burgeoned and it evolved from a rural to an urban State.

That focus began to change with the passage of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act (ISTEA) of 1991, which required each 

State to prepare a long range transportation plan (LRP), along with a 

short-term statewide transportation improvement program (STIP) consistent with the State’s long range goals. North Carolina began developing 

its long range plan as a result of the ISTEA provision, but the focus was 

still primarily on new construction.

In response to concern over the Nation’s aging transportation infrastructure, FHWA, the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) and several industry associations implemented National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP) 

Project 14-12 on Maintenance Quality Assurance. The focus of the 

program was on measuring maintenance performance by level of service 

(LOS) for randomly selected roadway features on a given highway network. NCDOT became aware of Project 14-12 and developed the Maintenance Condition Assessment Program (MCAP) to survey and evaluate 

the condition of the State’s highway assets in order to estimate the needs 

for routine maintenance and resurfacing. 

A short time later, the North Carolina State Legislature passed General 

Statute 136-44.3 (Maintenance Program), which requires NCDOT to 

survey the condition of the State highway system in even-numbered years 

and report the findings to the State legislature. The MCAP satisfied the 

requirements of the General Statute, and NCDOT Operations made the 

commitment to conduct a statewide assessment every two years for the 

Interstate, primary, secondary and urban systems. (The agency’s goal is 

95 percent accuracy, plus or minus three percent, in the data collected.) 

Construction and expansion projects were still prevalent in the DOT’s 

plan, but the focus began to turn more toward conditions and maintenance – and ultimately, with assistance from AASHTO and FHWA, to 

system preservation and asset management.
Resurfacing a country road.

What Did North Carolina Want?

North Carolina wished to serve its citizens while simultaneously preparing to meet long-term transportation needs. In addition, the department 

wanted a comprehensive transportation/asset management plan that 

would 1) provide an investment strategy based on the department’s guiding principles, and 2) serve as a policy guideline to support future investment decision-making. Documents such as the MCAP report had proven 

invaluable in educating the legislature, public and other stakeholders on 

the maintenance needs of the department and in increasing awareness of 

the importance of infrastructure preservation, but the department knew it 

needed a more comprehensive asset management approach. Estimates of 

both infrastructure needs and available revenue would be key to making 

informed, realistic decisions and maximizing North Carolina’s financial 

resources. 

For this to happen, NCDOT needed to 1) obtain the best system data 

possible, and 2) develop a comprehensive asset management/long range 

plan that was performance driven. NCDOT staff knew that this would 

require a departure from past practice, where documents were developed 

in-house and remained with the planning division. Creating a comprehensive long range plan document would require involvement from all 

divisions as well as a concerted public involvement effort.


HOW DID north carolina GET THERE?

In 2000 NCDOT established a multimodal steering committee consisting of 13 members from all modes/functions, plus two ex-officio FHWA 

members, to guide the development of the Long Range Statewide Transportation Plan. This committee spent 18 months conducting a scoping 

process to determine available funding ($55 billion) and needs ($84 billion).

DOT planners started reviewing the State’s infrastructure needs and 

developed two distinct methodologies for categorizing infrastructure concerns. The first method classified transportation facility and service needs 

into one of three tiers – statewide, regional or sub-regional – by interest 

and use. The statewide tier, for example, focuses on the needs of the 

infrastructure receiving the most use, i.e., Interstate, US routes, etc., and 

enabled NCDOT to identify a backbone network of 55 highway facilities 

(referred to as Strategic Highway Corridors) that represent 7 percent of 

NCDOT’s highway miles but carry almost 50 percent of the State’s traffic.

The second method categorized needs by programmatic improvement 

categories – maintenance, system preservation, modernization and expansion. Examining future needs in this manner helped enhance public 

policy dialogue concerning how NCDOT should prioritize use of limited 

financial resources. This method also provided a basis for comparison to 

past expenditures and investment patterns.


 

              

             

             

            

       

             

               

             

              

              

               

         

       

        

      

         

       

         

 

         

       

          



  

   

Then NCDOT did something it had not undertaken before; the 

agency began a 30-month public involvement process where it asked constituents to provide input on the general direction of the department. The 

question to the public, stakeholders and elected officials was simple: with 

limited resources, how could NCDOT best allocate its transportation 

dollars against a backdrop of growing needs?

Utilizing what NCDOT planners term an organic process breathed 

new life into the planning process. “The process took on a life of its 

own in 2003,” says Assistant Programming Manager Al Avant. “People 

started calling and asking how the DOT was going to spend its $55 billion.” Public comments were incorporated into the report, and the board 

approved the Long Range Statewide Plan in September 2004. Then the 

work of implementing the plan – the agency’s blueprint for the next 25 

years – began.
10

WHERE IS north carolina TODAY? 

In 2003 NCDOT recognized the importance of asset management to the 

department as a whole and, as part of a reorganization effort, established 

an Asset Management Office under the Chief Engineer – Operations. 

This bureau is made up of centrally based units that support the division 

offices in asset management evaluations and activities.

NCDOT also recognized the need for a performance based management plan. The development of such a plan was led by a steering committee made up of staff from the Chief Engineer’s Office – Operations 

and Division Engineers. The steering committee is responsible for providing general oversight for seven functional workgroups (maintenance, 

pavement, bridges, traffic/ITS, roadside, construction, and funding and 

allocations), with representation from FHWA and the appropriate units. 

These workgroups were charged with developing a series of performance 

based measures (based on LOS) that support the long range plan and 

asset management philosophies. The department has identified several 

tasks for developing and implementing these measures. (See Performance 

Based Measures/Asset Management Tasks.)

NCDOT’s focus on transportation asset management has brought 

about numerous other changes, including the addition of a system preservation line item in the legislative budget; the changing of secondary roads 

legislation in 2005 to transition from a program focused solely on paving 

dirt roads to one that includes paved road improvement projects; and the 

development of management systems in pavement (PMS), maintenance 

(MMS), traffic signal maintenance, bridge (BMS) and geographic information systems (GIS). NCDOT’s goal is for all of these systems to one 

day communicate with a common data system.

In addition, as part of the department’s effort to keep the 2004 Long 

Range Statewide Transportation Plan a living document, NCDOT has committed itself to updating the needs and revenue analysis every two years and 

conducting a full plan update (including citizen input and an investment 

direction) every four years. In light of this, the department undertook a midcycle update in 2006. NCDOT will release its findings in the spring of 2007.

Performance Based Measures/Asset Management Tasks

Develop Operations Strategic Plan

➣	 Develop and implement performance measures and targets.

➣	 Determine resources needed to achieve targets.

➣	 Develop related funding methodology.

➣	 Obtain support of senior management.

Fully Implement Long Range Statewide Plan and Operations Strategic Plan

➣	 Have asset management assessment and evaluation process in place.

➣	 Meet performance/LOS targets and adjust as needed.
11

WHAT HAS NORTH CAROLINA LEARNED?

The Asset Management Office has garnered several lessons from 

NCDOT’s development of a comprehensive transportation asset management program.

First and foremost, says Asset Management Director Lacy Love, a 

DOT should start with something it is already doing, e.g., pavement 

preservation, and expand over time. NCDOT has been working on its 

TAM program for eight years, and the program is still evolving.

Second, TAM must have buy-in at all levels – from the chief executive 

to the front line manager; implementing a comprehensive TAM program 

requires a team approach and a willingness to change from what Love 

terms a “firefighting” approach to a planning mode. Involving the public 

is also a vital component of a successful TAM effort.

Third, a DOT needs to give field personnel the tools they need in 

order to make intelligent decisions regarding system conditions and maintenance priorities. By establishing performance measures, a measurement 

methodology and robust management systems, the department is poised 

to provide the motorists of North Carolina with the highest possible 

return on their investment dollar. Love cites the example of using personal digital assistants (PDAs) for maintenance managers so that they can 

accurately capture what’s being done on DOT roadways. For NCDOT, 

this type of commitment is essential to improving LOS from the ground 

up.

Hamlet Rail Station.
12

WHAT’S NEXT?

NCDOT is in the process of rolling out its highway performance based 

measures. The agency has begun an update of the Long Range Statewide 

Transportation Plan and is continuing the development of its management systems. The next major undertaking will be seeking stakeholder 

support on the State’s commitment to performance based measures and 

LOS. The bottom line, says Love, is providing the biggest return for each 

dollar spent on transportation assets, a goal that is becoming reality as 

NCDOT expands its TAM program.

MLK Parkway.
Additional information is available from the following:

Lacy D. Love

Director, Asset Management

NC DOT

919-733-2330

llove@dot.state.nc.us

Francine Shaw-Whitson

Transportation Manager and Leader,

Evaluation & Economic Investment Team

FHWA, Office of Asset Management

202-366-8028

fshaw-whitson@dot.gov

Photography Credit

All photos courtesy of the

North Carolina Department of Transportation.
Office of Asset Management

Federal Highway Administration

U.S. Department of Transportation

400 Seventh Street, SW, HIAM-1

Washington, DC 20590

Telephone: 202-366-0392

Fax: 202-366-9981

www.fhwa.dot.gov/infrastructure/asstmgmt

FHWA-IF-07-010