Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.
42 1. McCormick, C.R. Make Liquidated Damages Work. AACE Inter- national 2003 Annual Meeting, CDR151-CDR157, Orlando, FL. 2. American Association of State Highway and Transportation. Primer on Contracting: For the Twenty-First Century, 2006: A Report of the Contract Administration Task Force of the AASHTO Subcommittee on Construction, 5th ed. Washington, DC, 2005. 3. Florida Department of Transportation. Innovative and Alternative Contracting Practices. Tallahassee, 1996. 4. Anderson, S.D., and Russell, J.S. NCHRP Report 451: Guidelines for Warranty, Multi-Parameter, and Best Value Contracting. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2001. 5. Florida Department of Transportation. Construction Project Admin- istration Manual. Tallahassee, 2003. 6. Innovative Contracting Manual. Ohio Department of Transporta- tion, Columbus, OH, 2006. 7. New York State Department of Transportation. Guidelines for the Use of Time-Related Contract Provision. Albany, NY, 1999. 8. Pinnacle One. Summary Level Study of A+B Bidding. California Department of Transportation, Sacramento, CA, 2005. 9. California Department of Transportation. Innovative Contracting Test and Evaluation. Sacramento, CA, 1993. 10. California Department of Transportation. Summary Initial Report for Innovative Contracting Practices. Sacramento, CA, 1993. 11. California Department of Transportation. The Lessons Learned From the Northridge Earthquake. Sacramento, CA, 1995. 12. Livingston, J. Lessons Learned from a Travel Time Incentive/ Disincentive on State Route 68 in Arizona, In Compendium: Papers on Advanced Surface Transportation Systems. Presented at 2002 Mentors Program Advanced Surface Transportation Systems, College Station, TX, 2002. 13. Ibba, C. Strategies Used by State DOTs to Accelerate Highway Construction Projects. In Compendium: Papers on Advanced Sur- face Transportation Systems, Presented at 2002 Mentors Program Advanced Surface Transportation Systems, College Station, TX, 2002. 14. Washington State Department of Transportation. Road User Cost Computation. Olympia, WA, 1991. 15. Trimels, K. A. Lane Rental in Wyoming. FHWA, Cheyenne, WY, 2000. 16. Strong, K. C., Tometich, J., and Raadt, N. Cost Effectiveness of Design-Build, Lane Rental, and A + B Contracting Techniques. Presented at 2005 Mid-Continent Transportation Research Sym- posium, Ames, IA, 2005. 17. United States Government Accountability Office. Report to the Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, House of Representatives. FEDERAL-AID HIGHWAYS, Increased Reliance on Contractors Can Pose Oversight Challenges for Federal and State Officials, Washington, DC, 2008. 18. Martin, P., Stevanovic, A., and Disegni, R. User Costs on the I-15 Design-Build Reconstruction, Report No. UT-03.23. Civil & Envi- ronmental Engineering Department, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, 2003. 19. Bryden, J.E., and Mace, D.J. NCHRP Report 475: A Procedure for Assessing and Planning Nighttime Highway Construction and Mainte- nance. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2002. 20. Bryden, J.E., and Mace, D.J. NCHRP Report 476: Guidelines for Design and Operation of Nighttime Traffic Control for Highway Maintenance and Construction. TRB, National Research Council, Washington, DC, 2002. 21. Federal Highway Administration. Work Zone Safety and Mobility Program. U.S. Department of Transportation. ops.fhwa.dot.gov/wz/ resources/facts_stats.htm. Accessed Dec. 2008). 22. Holstein, David. Work Zone Crash Analysis & Traffic Management in Work ZonesâThe ODOT MOT Process. Presented at the 2005 Smart Work Zone Deployment Initiative Conference, Bettendorf, Iowa, May 10â11, 2005. 23. Dembe A.E., Erickson J.B., Delbos R.G., and Banks S.M. The Impact of Overtime and Long Work Hours on Occupational Injuries and Illnesses: New Evidence from the United States. Occupational Environmental Medicine, Vol. 62, 2005, pp. 588-597. 24. Salem, O., and Ashraf, G. Improved Models for User Costs Analysis. Ohio Department of Transportation, Office of Research and Devel- opment, Columbus, 2007. 25. New Jersey Department of Transportation. Road User Cost Manual. Trenton, 2001. 26. Gillespie, J. S. Estimating Road User Costs as a Basis for Incentive/ Disincentive Amounts in Highway Construction Contracts. Virginia Transportation Research Council, VTRC 98-12, Charlottesville, 1998. 27. Olguin, E.T., Allison, B.T., and McCullough, B.F. Effectiveness of Accelerating Highway Rehabilitation in Urban Areas. Research Report SWUTC 60058-1, SWUTC/95/60058-1. Center for Trans- portation Research, The University of Texas at Austin, 1995. 28. Federal Highway Administration. Contract Administration Core Curriculum Participantâs Manual and Reference Guide. U. S. Department of Transportation, Washington, DC, 2006. 29. Maryland Department of Transportation State Highway Adminis- tration. Maryland State Highway Authority Guidelines for the Use of Bidding Procedures, Liquidated Damages, Road User Benefit Cost, Incentive/Disincentives, Special Bidding Methods A + B Bidding Methods. Baltimore, MD, 1994. 30. Sillars, D. N. Establishing Guidelines for Incentive/Disincentive Contracting at ODOT. Oregon Department of Transportation, Salem, OR, 2007. 31. Felker, B. Guidelines for Use of A+B Bidding Provisions. California Department of Transportation, Memorandum, Sacramento, 2002. References