Managing Selected Transportation Assets: Signals, Lighting, Signs, Pavement Markings, Culverts, and Sidewalks (2007)

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.

OVERVIEW One objective of this synthesis study has been to gain a bet- ter understanding of the state of practice for managing trans- portation infrastructure assets other than pavements and bridges. The state of practice has been presented in chapters two through seven, respectively, for each of the six types of assets that are the focus of this study: traffic signals, roadway lighting, signs, pavement markings, drainage culverts, and sidewalks. These results have been aggregated across all assets and are presented here as a composite of findings in the section, “Synthesis of Current Practice.” Other objectives of this study were to identify best prac- tices and to document gaps in existing knowledge and needs for further research. To provide a framework for analyzing these aspects of the study, we have applied the framework of asset management that was introduced in chapter one. Infor- mation on agencies’ practices in the context of a compre- hensive asset management approach was obtained from the following sources: • Inclusion of a separate part of the synthesis survey that asked open-ended questions regarding: – Participants’ use of asset management; – What they saw as gaps in knowledge, research needs, and other impediments to better management prac- tice; and – Any other assets (other than pavements and bridges) to which they apply techniques that include a knowl- edge of service life and predictions of future condi- tion and resource needs. • A literature review of U.S. and international practices in asset management, focusing particularly on non- pavement, non-bridge assets. This information is summarized in the following section, “Synthesis of Current Practice.” Subsequent sections discuss the following: • A description of current initiatives in asset manage- ment, including existing systems already in place, systems currently being developed by agencies, and applications of legacy systems and procedures to asset management. • A review of international experience as identified by an international scan team that visited cities, states/ 118 provinces, and national transportation agencies in Canada, England, Australia, and New Zealand. There is also a brief description of Canada’s InfraGuide resource. • A discussion of the importance of selected assets and possible ways to provide better information on their value and performance impacts. • A description of the public involvement process and its role in asset management. • A compilation of overarching knowledge gaps, other impediments to asset management, and research needs that cut across asset classes, as identified by respondents to the study survey. • As a final step, all of the findings of this study are brought together in a review matrix based on the crite- ria presented in Table 1. This review matrix evaluates the maturity of current practice in managing the six selected assets, and potential improvements that can be made in several areas. SYNTHESIS OF CURRENT PRACTICE Previous chapters have covered the results of the synthesis survey and literature review for each individual selected asset. In this section we summarize the survey results and reviews of the literature are summarized across all six assets, considering common themes that emerge from the several sets of findings, as well as contrasting indications of practice among assets and across agencies. Management Approaches Although management practices across the selected assets share a number of common attributes, there is a mixed picture in how far different agencies have progressed in their procedures and ability to provide information about such assets. • Agencies were relatively consistent in listing the policy goals that they felt are most important with respect to selected assets and the sources of guidance they rely on for managing these assets. Safety, travel efficiency and convenience, and asset preservation were cited consis- tently as driving forces in installing and managing these assets effectively. The most important sources of man- agement guidance were believed to be agency policies, procedures, and guidelines (for both new installations CHAPTER EIGHT SELECTED ASSETS IN THE CONTEXT OF ASSET MANAGEMENT

119 and maintenance and rehabilitation of existing assets), national standards, and federal and state statutes. • Many of these selected assets are maintained and oper- ated through a blend of public- and private-sector responsibility. The owning agency, private contractors, and other levels of government share in managing and conducting work on these assets, although the degree of respective involvement and the assignment of decision- making authority among these groups vary by type of asset. • Although some agencies have developed comprehen- sive asset management approaches for selected assets, others lack information on even basic aspects of these assets, such as annual expenditures and inventory quantity. One reason may be that some agencies view these selected assets as components of a larger trans- portation “asset,” such as a road or intersection, and inventory and expenditure data are not kept at the level of detail of the asset itself. (More will be said on this point later.) Where agencies do have such information, as in maintenance management systems, the data may be incomplete from a life-cycle perspective; for exam- ple, they may encompass annual maintenance expendi- tures, but not the capital costs of new installations or replacement. The examples of asset inventory data that were submitted by agencies represented widely rang- ing practices in how assets are classified and to what level of detail. • Agencies reported that they apply a mix of approaches to managing and budgeting for selected assets. Preven- tive maintenance, repair immediately upon failure, prioritization of existing needs according to resource availability, and worst-first repair strategies are the major management approaches that are applied to these assets. Individual agencies may employ a blend of these approaches for each type of selected asset, basing the decision of which method to use on criteria such as the priority of the asset, the type of damage occurring, the functional class of the road on which it is located, and the judgment of responsible district managers. Similarly, agencies use a mix of budgeting methods, with the major approaches including applying the pre- vious year’s budget plus inflation and other adjust- ments, and basing budgets on a combination of agency professional judgment, political inputs, and public com- ments. Although budgeting based on asset condition or some related measure such as level of service is em- ployed by some agencies, it is not the main philosophy for any of the selected assets. Many agencies reported that they use a combination of approaches rather than a single budgeting method. Asset Condition and Service Life Agencies provided information on how they characterize asset condition, how they collect these condition data, and how they apply estimated service life, if at all. Common threads in practices across selected assets included the following: • Agencies reported that the condition of selected assets is identified generally by physical condition (quanti- tative and qualitative measures), the number of customer complaints, asset age, and some character- istic of operational performance such as reliability or conformance to standard. Other types of measures are used for specific assets as described in the previous chapters, but these are the main measures used across the board. • The predominant method of data collection for a selected asset condition is visual inspection. Cus- tomer complaints were reported as the second-most- used method, followed by some type of physical measurement, nondestructive testing, photologging, or videologging. • Many agencies provided information about the expected service life of asset components, even if they do not use service life formally in their management systems. Although information on service life is potentially avail- able from several sources, the survey results indicated a strong reliance on agency experience and staff profes- sional judgment in estimating service-life values. • When the survey results from all agencies were com- bined, virtually all asset components were characterized by a distribution of estimated service lives, in many cases with a considerable spread between minimum and maximum values. This situation may be in part the result of differences in materials or technology that are used among agencies, a lack of standardized methods or cri- teria for defining service life, and resulting reliance on staff judgment. This variability in service-life data from the survey is mirrored by corresponding data in the literature. • When asked how they determine where selected assets are in their service lives, agencies responded in several ways: – Some noted that they monitor service-life condition on a periodic or at least an occasional basis. – Others responded that service life itself is not an issue for one of the following reasons: (1) assets are ad- dressed immediately on failure or on a set schedule, (2) the actual useful life is determined more by func- tional performance rather than by physical condition, or (3) they do not use service life in their management procedures. – Attempts to model service life have produced mixed results, owing to variability in the underlying perfor- mance data. • Analytic methods for predicting or evaluating service life do exist, but these are used primarily at the design and installation phase of selected assets. This informa- tion may not be carried over into subsequent operation and maintenance.

Information Technology and Modeling Support As a practical matter, IT is critical to asset management. Agencies responded in the following ways regarding their IT capabilities for the selected assets of this study: • The most prevalent IT capabilities address inventory quantity and location, current asset condition and age, photographic documentation for certain assets, inspec- tion and maintenance data, and tracking of public com- ments. • The state of practice in IT for selected assets is not as well developed as that for pavements and bridges. There were relatively few reports of management systems that integrate features typically found in pavement and bridge management, including: – Deterioration and cost models; – Economic decision-support tools such as life-cycle analysis or benefit–cost analysis; and – Models of the impacts of asset condition and perfor- mance; for example, on mobility, safety, and benefits to the general public. • Several types of IT tools are used by reporting agencies, including asset-specific management systems, more broad-based management systems such as maintenance management or transportation infrastructure asset man- agement systems that encompass other assets as well as the selected assets, and simple programs and spreadsheet workbooks. In many instances agencies reported more than one type of system in use; for example, within dif- ferent parts of the organization such as central office and districts. • For better or worse, agencies’ IT capabilities to manage selected assets are influenced by the characteristics of their legacy systems. In a positive response, FDOT noted its ability to apply its Maintenance Rating Pro- gram (MRP) approach to several of the selected assets, drawing on the functionality of its existing maintenance management system. In a negative sense, several other agencies noted that their existing systems lack an inventory of assets, not only precluding the use of this information for management, but also providing no existing organizational and procedural framework to undertake data collection. INITIATIVES IN ASSET MANAGEMENT The synthesis survey participants were asked to relate their management practices for selected assets to their efforts in broader asset management, to identify other assets for which they have developed performance-based management approaches, and what overarching issues need to be addressed to improve management practice. These responses were sup- plemented by a review of the literature in U.S. and international asset management practice, particularly for non-pavement, non- bridge assets. The following sections describe information resources and practices by agencies that have instituted an asset 120 management approach for selected assets, efforts that are now underway to develop such an approach for selected assets, and agencies that are applying legacy systems to provide an exist- ing performance-based approach for selected assets. Current Asset Management Approaches, Systems, and Guidelines Asset Management Data Collection Guide AASHTO Task Force 45, comprising representatives of AASHTO, American Road and Transportation Builders Association, and Associated General Contractors of America, has developed a comprehensive Asset Management Data Collection Guide (2006). This document provides detailed guidance on condition assessment for non-electronic highway assets. In terms of the six selected assets, it covers culverts, signs, and pavement markings (striping as well as pavement markers). For each asset, it presents a definition of the asset, its inventory attributes, condition attributes, and descriptions of potential condition states or performance targets. In terms of survey comments described in previous chapters regarding the need for standardization of methods and data, the Guide takes several steps in this direction. In addition, it provides a standard vocabulary for describing assets and a uniform tech- nical basis for evaluating assets in the field. City of Portland (Oregon) The city of Portland has a comprehensive asset management approach for each of its assets. This approach is based on the development of asset management plans that provide general information on asset current status and trends in inventory, con- dition, and asset value, by component if appropriate; related budget and staffing history; standards and current service lev- els; statistics and comparisons with peer jurisdictions regard- ing organizational efficiency; predictions of asset condition as a function of varying service levels and assumptions; and over- all program direction. With respect to the selected assets in this study, plans to date have been prepared for traffic signals, street lights, signs, pavement markings, and sidewalks. These plans are the basis of subsequent identification and ranking of needs, benefit–cost analyses of different level-of-service strategies in conjunction with needs to produce 5-year program forecasts, and resulting recommendations for capital and operating bud- gets (Portland Transportation . . . 2004). These plans are supplemented annually by a condition and status report for each asset, updating information on asset condition, changes in replacement value, and unmet needs. This information is used in Portland’s planning, policy development, and implementation and monitoring of strate- gic action plans (Portland Transportation . . . 2004). Although this framework is comprehensive, not all data have not yet been collected, nor are there sufficient reporting

121 and analysis tools in place to have a truly comprehensive asset management program. A set of work management tools is linked to a GIS-based inventory for each asset class. Each asset class has a map and data layer in the GIS. New assets are created from the mapping-application side of the asset man- agement system. Labor, equipment, and materials are tracked at asset-specific and nonasset-specific levels. Programming decisions in signs and pavement markings are currently focused on managing asset growth by instituting improved documentation of capital and maintenance processes. The tools available lack only the resources to gather and enter into the system so that more advanced asset management practices can be incorporated into the decision-making process. Portland is one of the few survey respondents that use asset valuation as an element of its asset management. New Mexico DOT Road Feature Inventory The FHWA recently completed a series of case studies of roadway safety hardware, specifically looking at instances where integrated databases were applied in the management of these assets. The FHWA study is of interest, because there is substantial overlap between roadway safety hard- ware and the selected assets covered in this study: signs; signals; roadway lighting; support structures for signs, sig- nals, and lighting; and pavement markings are included in both populations. One of the FHWA study’s cases, for the New Mexico DOT, illustrates the capabilities of what could fairly be called a state-of-the-art system. A data collection van is used to col- lect images of the roadway and roadside for inclusion in New Mexico’s Road Feature Inventory (RFI). The RFI contains both images and data that are used to support maintenance management and ease legal liability. At the time of report publication, the RFI contained more than 5 million images. The images are used in two basic ways: for reporting and for a “Virtual Drive” along a selected highway. These capabili- ties are available to all departments within the DOT to help them fulfill their roles in asset management (Hensing and Rowshan 2005). Ongoing Efforts to Develop an Asset Management Approach City of Edmonton The city of Edmonton has formal management systems for pavement, bridges, vehicles, and buildings. The management systems for other infrastructure assets are in various stages of development and, although there is currently no overall corpo- rate electronic asset management system, the data from each of the asset stewardship areas is synthesized by the Office of Infrastructure into a common format. Although the quality of data varies, senior management and the city council can get a sense of the relative value, condition, functionality, capacity, and risk exposure of all the corporation’s assets. For example, condition information from each asset area is distilled into per- centages of “Very Good,” “Good,” “Fair,” “Poor,” and “Very Poor” inventory. This standardized rating system applies across the corporation and provides a valuable tool to support improved decision making. This information can assist in the prioritization of projects through the capital budget. The city is implementing an innovative prioritization tool with the intent of using both the inventory and the financial information as input to a risk model as a way of prioritizing projects to assign available funding. The objective of this exercise is to remove some of the subjectivity from the allo- cation of budget dollars and to provide decision makers with the information to make the tough decisions. This complex risk model examines the infrastructure assets owned and/or operated by a particular infrastructure area. These assets are further classified into groups, where each group comprises assets with similar performance characteris- tics. The deterioration of each of the assets in a group is mod- eled to reflect current conditions, the natural aging process, the actual use and performance history, and the rehabilitation strategy applied to that asset. These models are used to predict the assets’ conditions and the expected failures within the asset over time. A “severity” indicator is estimated for each asset to represent the level of exposure to risk the city faces as a result of the asset’s state. The application of a severity indicator in combination with the current budget and a long-range financial investment plan enables the city to predict the future state and condition of infrastructure assets in relation to various investment scenarios. By determining the severity of the risks associated with current infrastructure investment, the civic administra- tion will be able to compare disparate infrastructure elements on a corporate level and determine which critical areas require the most urgent action. Maryland SHA Each of the six asset categories covered by this synthesis has a dedicated fund category for the asset and a dedicated fund man- ager(s). Several of the asset categories have direct agency busi- ness plan objectives, establishing a service-level objective for the asset. Expenditures are based on need, but annual budget allocations for each asset category, although considering needs, tend to be adjustments to historical allocations. Tradeoff analy- ses between asset categories are not formally done. The SHA is now conducting internal assessments of its highway assets, including five of the selected assets in this study: culverts, lighting, pavement markings, signs, and traf- fic signals. Each assessment of an individual asset summa- rizes information about the asset in the following areas:

• Overview of the asset—the main categories of assets, approximate quantities, asset value, and general infor- mation. • Inventory information—what data are inventoried or not inventoried, how these data are used, how inventory data are collected and at what level of effort and cost, geographic referencing, level of confidence in inventory data, and frequency of update. • Condition information—what data are collected and how they are used, information that is not collected, in- formation that should be collected, what performance measures and outcomes pertain, level of effort and cost of collection, sampling strategy, level of confidence in the data, update frequency, and IT support. • Deterioration modeling issues—what models exist, capability to project 5 years out, level of confidence in these projects, and any studies needed to enable reason- able deterioration estimates to be made. • Decision making—descriptions of how programs for the asset are now developed, how proposed actions are iden- tified, relationship between capital and maintenance actions, how funding needs are established and linked to performance outcomes, how the program is delivered, and problems inhibiting selection of the best strategy. • Strengths and opportunities for improvement. This effort represents a work in progress. However, the draft materials that have been reviewed as part of the study survey indicate a strong attempt to deal with many of the issues raised in previous chapters, and in many cases reflect the findings on the current status of management of these selected assets. Michigan DOT MDOT has embarked on a program to develop GIS-based inventories of physical items with statewide uniformity, con- sistency, and thoroughness. The effort is referred to as the Statewide Physical Features Inventory, or SPFI. The main purpose of SPFI is to understand “where things are” on the highway system in a consistent, unambiguous, and rigorous way. To date, 22 items have been proposed for inclusion in this effort; however, this proposed list is likely to adjust over time. Among the selected assets it includes culverts, lighting, pavement markings, signs, and traffic signals. Other items include billboards, permanent concrete barriers, excess prop- erty, pavement cores, water-quality monitoring wells, snow- mobile crossings, and weigh stations. Each item will be located with the aid of a GPS device. One purpose served by this proposal is to be able to fix the location of these items precisely for purposes of program cost tracking and auditing, particularly where contractors are per- forming maintenance. A higher degree of accountability is introduced if these items can be identified by precise location. The approach has clear benefits for asset management as well, in that it satisfies the need for a basic management capability 122 identified in the surveys: a record of the inventory and loca- tion of highway assets, their condition, and an accumulating history of maintenance work performed and costs. Moreover, it provides a platform for quick, accurate, and timely updates of inventory information as work is being done statewide. In addition to maintenance management, this information can be applied to strategic planning of the specific asset and future maintenance project selection. One issue that MDOT staff has had to address in decid- ing which items to include in SPFI is whether the item is an “asset” in its own right, or a “feature” of some other asset. The designation of asset or feature influences to what extent and detail the department tracks information about the item, if at all, in its database. Although MDOT raised this issue explicitly in follow-up discussions to its survey responses regarding SPFI, other agencies have identified related issues as to what priority and resources are due the selected assets. Michigan has conducted a field trial to build a guardrail in- ventory using the SPFI approach. The trial demonstrated the feasibility of accurate and efficient field data collection using available resources; for example, co-ops, state workers, Youth Corps, and similar groups. An issue that MDOT is now working on is to enlist the cooperation of contractors performing maintenance so that they can electronically record information on work completed on these assets by lo- cation and upload the information to MDOT databases so that the asset inventory can be updated. NYSDOT A Maintenance Asset Management Information System (MAMIS) is being customized for use at NYSDOT and was scheduled to go into production use during 2006. This system upgrade replaces mainframe legacy system capabilities. MAMIS will be used for work management, accomplish- ment reporting, and time and attendance. The system enables work planning to be linked to the department’s five Priority Results Areas, and completed work can be assessed in terms of the Priority Results Areas as well. The work management component is a management engine that enables a manager to review all needs from work plans, inventory and condition inspection systems, routine patrols, or service requests, and then apply filters to those needs to select which work will be done. The user can then assign the work to either state forces by means of a work order or to contractor forces through a contract order, and the work can be tracked to completion and accomplishments reported. Work and contract orders can be combined into projects for costing, bonding, or emergency relief purposes. A parallel project is also ongoing to inventory and inspect key assets such as culverts, guide rail, ditches, signs, and

123 environmental/vegetation management areas to enhance asset management capabilities in MAMIS. As in-house and contracted work gangs complete work orders on assets, they will incrementally populate the MAMIS system with physi- cal inventory, condition, and performance attributes of those assets. These enhancements will be integrated into the system, but will also be available to stand-alone users. The ability to assess regional needs will be used in the budget allocation process as well. The system will be available at the maintenance supervisory level to assist supervisors in mak- ing more informed work selection decisions. Other Survey Responses Other comments regarding ongoing work in asset manage- ment were reported by the following agencies: Selected assets are about to be tracked with our new software im- plementation of SAP. — Colorado DOT Region 3 NCDOT is currently in the process of developing Performance Measures for these elements. — North Carolina DOT At this time, the Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) is not utilizing a comprehensive approach to manage its assets. However, ODOT has recognized its importance and identified strategic priorities by approving a Department-wide Asset Man- agement Strategic Plan. A draft Implementation Plan has been presented for consideration and is currently undergoing refine- ment. — Oregon DOT We are presently working on a methodology to include most of these selected assets in our comprehensive Asset Management System. — Utah DOT Applications of Legacy Systems and Procedures FDOT FDOT refers to its strategic planning and management process as policy planning, although it has many of the attributes of asset management. It relies on a network of plans and pro- grams that are internally coordinated within a framework of goals and objectives. Goals define overarching concepts such as system preservation, mobility and economic competitive- ness, and organizational excellence and customer focus. Within each goal are one or more objectives that identify specific targets for attainment by the DOT and other state agencies. These objectives include targets for pavement and bridge condition and satisfaction of maintenance standards (Pagano et al. 2004). Florida’s maintenance management approach embodies an MRP. An MRP is a systematic process for rating highway elements by a numerical level of service, with appropriate weighting factors accounting for the type of facility (i.e., road classification) and the specific characteristic being rated (Stivers et al. 1999). Weighted scores are tallied by all ele- ments on a highway segment and by district on a 0–100 scale. The survey responses from FDOT indicated that the follow- ing selected assets are managed through the MRP process: culverts, lighting, signs, pavement markings, and sidewalks. Each district has a target of maintaining a minimum rating of 80 for all elements and 70 for each characteristic. Each district is allocated a budget for each characteristic based on inven- tory. When the district fails to meet its target, its expenditures are reviewed versus the budgeted amount, and it is expected to allocate more funding for that area. If on a statewide basis the budgeted amount fails to meet the target and is judged to be insufficient, then the budget may be increased for that char- acteristic. MRP is measured three times a year by sampling. NYSDOT NYSDOT uses the biennial update of the Statewide Trans- portation Improvement Program and metropolitan area Transportation Improvement Programs as the administrative framework for asset management. The 11 regional offices and 13 metropolitan planning organizations receive capital allocations, policy guidance, and performance targets. Capi- tal program committees evaluate candidate investments and propose a recommended program for statewide adoption by executive management. The capital investment candidates are heavily oriented to infrastructure renewal and preserva- tion. As a general rule, maintenance and operations take precedence over service extensions and system betterments. Assuring a state of good repair for assets is a policy objective for all modes. The operating budget process for highway maintenance is an annual process. Regions receive allocations and program them to meet identified needs. South Carolina DOT Elements of the department’s asset management approach in- clude: • A highway maintenance management system address- ing all maintenance activities, • A signals inventory, and • A roadway inventory management system. MnDOT The MnDOT Transportation Plan (2008–2030) is performance- based. The six areas addressed in this survey are included in this plan. From this plan a 10-year work program is developed, followed by the 3-year State Transportation Improvement Program. At this time, performance measures and targets have not been fully developed for each of these areas.

INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCE In 2005, a team sponsored by the FHWA, AASHTO, and NCHRP conducted an international scan of transportation asset management practice in Australia, Canada, England, and New Zealand. The scan included visits with agencies at the national, provincial or state, and local levels. The report pro- duced by this team contains a substantial amount of informa- tion on asset management as a business process as well as an organizational culture. Consequently, it looked not only at the technical aspects of asset performance and repair, but also more broadly at the factors that encourage asset management in the institutional and political context in which the agency operates, the role of asset plans, supporting management sys- tems, and interactions with the public (Geiger et al. 2005). Although there are many aspects of asset management that are discussed in the scan report, the following items provide examples of how agencies in Europe, Australia, and Canada approach asset management, the role of transportation asset management within broad public policy, and how interna- tional agencies deal with selected assets. The material in the following sections (with the exception of the InfraGuide) is taken from the report of the international scan team (Geiger et al. 2005). Asset Management Principles and Plans Basic approaches to asset management are described here for several national, state-level, and municipal agencies. Several elements are common across these approaches, such as a strategic view of asset performance and life-cycle cost, involvement of the community in the decision-making process, and a goal of using resources wisely and sustainably. • England—In its key principles of asset management, England includes strategic management with a long- term view and a reliance on life-cycle costing, defining and tracking of levels of service, managing for risk of failure or loss of use of an asset, working toward a sus- tainable use of physical resources, and understanding asset management as a process of continuous improve- ment. • New South Wales Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA)— RTA recognizes that transportation competes for scarce public funding with other governmental functions such as health and education, and views asset management as a way to strengthen the position of transportation in this resource allocation. Asset management is seen as an integrated systems approach to maintain, upgrade, and operate physical assets cost-effectively in responding to customer levels-of-service targets. Doing this requires both engineering information (e.g., deterioration mod- els) and economic analyses. • Victoria, Australia (VicRoads)—The transportation asset management practices of VicRoads follow “opti- mal asset management” concepts put forth by the 124 Department of Treasury. These concepts include defin- ing levels of service to be delivered by assets in consul- tation with the community; applying life-cycle analyses in decision making; balancing competing needs across governmental functions by evaluating options and their outcomes; monitoring, evaluating, and improving service delivery; managing risk to ensure continuity of service; using resources sustainably; and undertaking a process of continuous improvement. • City of Brisbane, Queensland, Australia—Brisbane sees asset management as providing a strategic direction and consistent framework for its facility planning, enabling it to meet community expectations for ser- vices. Asset management works to preserve assets at the lowest life-cycle cost, and helps the city to improve the use of its asset portfolio and dispose of surplus assets. Brisbane has developed comprehensive 10-year asset management plans for its transportation assets. For ex- ample, its traffic signals and electronic control devices plan includes sections on levels of service (including customer expectation as well as legislative require- ments, and comparisons between current and desired levels); an analysis of future demand; a life-cycle man- agement plan; discussion of risk management; a finan- cial summary related to the asset in terms of its valua- tion and expenditures for capital repair, maintenance, and renewal; asset management practices and systems; and plan improvement and monitoring. Brisbane has de- veloped a tradeoff analysis to prioritize needs and help the city council determine the optimal mix of invest- ments. This analysis is based on deficiencies and as- sessments of risks as compared with desired levels of service. • City of Edmonton, Alberta, Canada—Edmonton has based its asset management approach on maintaining a state of good repair of its assets and ensuring adequate funding of development and rehabilitation programs that are effective and efficient. Major drivers of asset man- agement include the need to use limited funding wisely, to communicate the linkage between funding and service levels to the public, and to compare investment options. Edmonton has likewise developed asset management plans, as well as a sophisticated set of analytic tools and the ability to conduct scenario or “what-if?” analyses. Its performance measures reflect condition, functionality, and demand capacity for all asset categories. Asset Valuation Asset valuation is used by a number of other countries as a component of their transportation infrastructure management. The scan team visited several agencies that apply an asset valuation approach, although specific methods differ, particu- larly regarding the degree to which management systems are used as a basis for determining remaining service life, and what definition of cost is used. These agencies were also dealing

125 with questions on matters such as service life, similar to the U.S. concerns described in chapters two through seven. An overview of different infrastructure asset valuation techniques was described in a recent paper (Cowe Falls and Haas 2000). • Transit New Zealand (TNZ) (an agency responsible for highways and roads) has organized its asset valuation procedures within an Asset Valuation Manual. One- third of the network is revalued each year. Replacement costs are calculated from agency contract data, unit cost records, and identified databases, including drainage culverts and traffic facilities (Geiger et al. 2005, Table 5). How to define service life remains an issue, how- ever. Among the questions being dealt with are the threshold value at which useful life can be considered to be exhausted and how to apply a concept of remaining useful life to systems such as ITS. • The specific techniques to be used in asset valuation are still under discussion. For example, the New South Wales RTA has concerns about straight-line deprecia- tion and the use of accounting standards as the basis of asset valuation. Although it continues to report asset value to the Department of Treasury according to the ac- counting rules and straight-line depreciation, it nonethe- less uses its asset management systems to rank work priorities. • Queensland’s Main Roads has actually reached an agreement with the Department of Treasury to use its management system outputs to compute remaining ser- vice life for pavements as the basis of its asset valuation. • Edmonton, Alberta, uses the replacement value of its as- sets as the basis of asset valuation. Using this approach, it has computed that transportation and streets are the second-largest component of the 12 asset categories for which the city is responsible. Performance-Based Management of Selected Assets The scan team observed a number of examples of how asset management processes and performance measures (including levels of service) were applied to selected assets. • English local road agencies devote considerable attention to roadway lighting management. In England, 80% of local governments are reported to have a street light data- base. A Roads Liaison Group has recommended that local agencies use national performance indicators for asset management, plus others to address specific local conditions. Although one group of performance mea- sures addresses service delivery and is intended for inter- nal agency use, a second group deals with the condition and performance of the roadway lighting network and is intended for public dissemination. These measures are in the following categories: – The total number of faults identified through inspec- tion, customer reports, and other sources; – Percentage of lights working as planned; – Total number of failed or faulty service connections; and – Total number and cost of damaging incidents as a result of vehicle crashes and vandalism. • The English Highways Agency has likewise given attention to its roadway lighting system. Approximately 32% of lighting standards are more than 30 years old, their expected useful life. Work is proceeding to develop deterioration models for roadway lighting to help agen- cies prioritize investment needs. • The scan team also observed that more attention appears to be given in England to sidewalks and appurtenances than is typically done in the United States. England also appears to lead U.S. agencies in applying performance measures in asset management. • Gloucestershire was an early advocate of asset manage- ment and its use in transport planning. Its county council has produced a statement of objectives, list of desired out- comes, definition of asset resources, and identification of risks associated with asset condition. Core assets that were defined included a number of items similar to selected assets; that is, street lighting, pedestrian guardrails, traffic signals, road markings and RPMs, urban sidewalks and paths, signs and bollards, urban bike paths, and drainage data. Gloucestershire has also performed a gap analysis comparing current versus desired level of service, the cost of closing the gap, and the resulting benefits to the public. An implementation plan will identify priorities and needed resources. • TNZ prepares monthly traffic light reports showing progress in key performance measures. The degree of progress is denoted by green (OK), yellow (warning), and red (action required) color symbols applied to measures of current status as well as directional trends. • Queensland Main Roads includes selected assets ex- plicitly in its asset management process. Transportation asset management is used for long-range planning and alignment of Main Roads actions with public policy goals, mid-range corridor planning and stewardship of existing assets, and near-term development of its 5-year Roads Implementation Program. Specific modules for roadside amenities, traffic control systems, and signage are included in Main Roads’ asset management system. • Brisbane’s asset management program has been instru- mental in providing the city council with information it needs to understand road transportation investment decisions across all assets. A particularly relevant aspect of this process has been to give importance to assets that normally do not receive much attention, including signs, signals, and pavement markings. The asset management process is assisted by an asset steering committee and is informed by community outreach and public input. • Edmonton tracks the conditions of several selected assets and components in its asset management systems includ- ing sidewalks, street lights, traffic signals, and traffic signs. It considers asset performance in three dimensions:

physical condition (and the ability to meet intended ser- vice levels), functionality, and demand versus capacity. • VicRoads (Victoria, Australia) applies a comprehensive asset management approach based on life-cycle analy- ses, desired or target levels of service, and strong ana- lytic capabilities. With respect to the selected assets of this study, it appears that VicRoads is able to apply service-life data that exhibit a range of values—for example, mechanical and electrical systems with lives estimated at 10 to 30 years, and tolling instrumentation with lives of 3–10 years. Organizational and Institutional Aspects The English Highways Agency provides guidance for asset management at a top management level through its Business Plan. Responsibility for asset management within each oper- ational area of the road network is vested in a managing agent, a private consultant with typically a 5-year contract to work with the agency’s maintenance contractor for the oper- ational area. In a variant of this arrangement, the managing agent and the maintenance contractor are combined within what is called a managing agent contractor. There is also con- siderable local government and professional association involvement in supporting asset management and providing technical assistance in England. Queensland Main Roads has established a Road Asset Maintenance Steering Committee to oversee development of asset management policy. The responsible unit within the agency is the Road Network Management Division, sup- ported by many other units providing data and expertise. TNZ has an organizational structure that encompasses four major groups or divisions: transport planning, network operations (where asset management responsibility is located), capital projects, and organizational support. This structure is mirrored in the regional offices. Approximately 50 individuals with asset management responsibilities are distributed among central and regional offices. The impor- tance attributed to asset management in TNZ is reflected in other agencies throughout the country. New Zealand exhib- ited perhaps the greatest degree of integration of asset man- agement principles and techniques in the agencies’ business processes that was observed by the scan team in its visits. As in England, there is considerable support for asset manage- ment from local governments and professional associations. Specific asset management responsibility is also assigned within the RTA (in its Directorate of Road Network Infra- structure), VicRoads (in its Road System Management Group, one of four core business areas), Brisbane (in the Transport and Traffic Program, with guidance on asset stew- ardship from an asset steering committee set up by city government), and Edmonton (in the Office of Infrastructure, established in March 2000). [Author’s note: As this report was going into production, users of the InfraGuide were in- 126 formed that it was being discontinued owing to lack of con- tinued funding. The website is no longer available.] Canada’s InfraGuide InfraGuide is a web-based resource providing access to best practices and other documents for a variety of infrastructure, including roads and sidewalks (www.infraguide.ca). It was established through a collaboration of Infrastructure Canada, the Federation of Canadian Municipalities, the Canadian Pub- lic Works Association, and the Canadian National Research Council. InfraGuide links users to published best practices, pending best practices, and other resources related to asset con- dition, performance, and management. As an example, the Canadian guidelines for sidewalks referenced in chapter seven are a best practices document available through InfraGuide. IMPORTANCE OF SELECTED ASSETS Given limited resources, prospects for advancing the man- agement practices for selected assets are clouded, according to survey responses in chapters two through seven and in the section in this chapter titled “Knowledge Gaps, Impediments, and Research Needs.” Moreover, it is difficult to gain in- creased attention and priority for these assets. Expenditures for signals, lighting, signs, markings, culverts, and sidewalks are not well itemized, and in any case are not felt to be a significant percentage of an agency’s annual transportation budget. Furthermore, there is a lack of good information that could build a stronger awareness of the value of these assets in serving mobility, safety, and public well-being. It is apparent from the survey comments that budget-related arguments do not, by themselves, build a compelling case for needed investment in selected assets. Rather, the research in this study indicates other approaches that may offer a better way to demonstrate the importance of these assets and the need for stronger asset management. • Replacement value—Although many jurisdictions over- seas employ asset replacement value as a key component of their transportation asset management—including selected assets—comparatively few agencies in the United States do so. In the responses received in the study survey, only three cities mentioned using asset value. Replacement value is not the same as the asset value called for by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 34 financial re- porting requirements (1999). Replacement value is man- agement-oriented rather than accounting-oriented, and gains or losses in value can be coordinated with results computed by management systems as an effective, on- going component of asset management. • Public impacts—The level of performance of the six selected assets addressed in this study have very strong implications for the public. These impacts affect trans- portation facility users in terms of mobility, safety, and

127 comfort. They also affect the general public in terms of safety and security (e.g., a community’s ability to deliver police, fire-fighting, and ambulance services quickly when needed), protection of property from flooding (which requires adequate, well-maintained culvert hydraulic and structural capacity), and environmental protection (e.g., reduced air pollution resulting from a well-functioning transportation system supported by effective signalization, signage, illumination, and pave- ment marking guidance; and fish passages and animal crossings provided by culverts). If performance degrades to failure of one of these assets, results can be severe; for example, a road closure owing to slope instability or pavement foundation cave-in at a collapsed culvert, or gridlock with a failed signal system. Culverts on the U.S. highway system are now beginning to approach their design lives, something that has not happened on a major scale in modern times. • Need to accommodate changes in demand—Chapters two through seven describe standards, guidelines, and procedures to design selected assets to meet anticipated demand. Ideally, these assets are upgraded or replaced to meet expected new demands; for example, in traffic volume and composition. However, changes in demand on selected assets will be undergoing fundamental shifts that have no historical precedent. A major example is the aging of the Baby Boomers, with implications for pedestrian as well as motor vehicle driver behavior. This behavior needs to be better understood, with appropriate responses in terms of the materials, systems, and operational characteristics of selected assets. Another example is the changing land use surrounding highways and street networks, and the growing recog- nition of fresh, pure water as a scarce resource. Culverts need to be designed, built, and maintained not only to protect the highway investment, but also to protect drainage courses and unpolluted water sources in the face of changing land-use patterns. PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT Encouraging public involvement in transportation policy decisions has been a force in the United States for more than 30 years, with power shifting from the federal government to the states and the empowerment of community groups to have a say in policies that affect them. There are several ben- efits of a well-designed and well-implemented program of public involvement (O’Connor et al. 2000): • Greater likelihood of citizen buy-in to policies, a feel- ing of public ownership and awareness of issues, and the likelihood of sustained public support over time. • Incorporation of community values in policy decisions. • More efficient decision processes and project imple- mentation owing to reduced risk of litigation and reduced need to revisit and reopen past decisions. • Enhanced agency credibility among stakeholders and greater mutual understanding of positions and thinking. Several guiding principles have evolved for successful community outreach and public involvement initiatives (O’Connor et al. 2000): • Understand the strong linkages but the distinctions that must be maintained among public involvement, public information, and public relations. • Conduct public involvement as an honest broker, provid- ing the public with ample opportunity to be heard, informing the public of options and constraints, engaging in a dialogue, listening to feedback, working through differences, and allowing the process to influence deci- sions and outcomes. • Ensure that public involvement is as inclusive as possi- ble, proactively encompassing a broad group of deci- sion makers and stakeholders. • Keep communications respectful and encourage mutual respect throughout the process. • Begin public involvement early in project or policy development and maintain it throughout development. • Ensure that participants understand the decision process that the agency will be undertaking. The process should be defined, structured, and transparent, and key mile- stones and decision points should be clearly explained. • Although public involvement programs need to serve as honest brokers with no predetermined outcomes, the agency must also provide leadership throughout the process to ensure that participants understand agency pol- icy, perspectives, and procedures. Agencies must also budget sufficient staff and dollar resources for this effort. Public involvement has been shown to benefit transporta- tion asset management programs and decisions. Within the United States, for example, Hillsborough County, Florida, found that effective public involvement was instrumental in maintaining funding and community support for develop- ment of its asset management system (Economics in Asset Management . . . 2005). In its performance audit of Portland’s service efforts and accomplishments, which include trans- portation and parking and their asset management programs, the city auditor conducts both citizen surveys and business surveys. Results of these two surveys are incorporated directly in the discussion of each city goal and agency per- formance in meeting that goal (City of Portland . . . 2005). The international scan team likewise observed several ways in which community participation is solicited in asset man- agement deliberations. For example, a research effort in Victoria examined public expectations for levels of service of several assets. Tools used to gain this information included interviews with stakeholders, focus groups, and a conjoint analysis that allowed participants to conduct tradeoff analy- ses across levels of service of these several assets. This conjoint analysis allowed VicRoads to infer a preferred redistribution of available resources across assets and among

different asset management activities. Brisbane uses public presentations and focus groups to obtain input from the com- munity on its asset management efforts. KNOWLEDGE GAPS, IMPEDIMENTS, AND RESEARCH NEEDS The gaps in existing knowledge, impediments to improved asset management, and research needs associated with each of the selected assets were identified in chapters two through seven, respectively. Additionally, synthesis survey partici- pants were asked their opinions on overarching issues and research needs related to asset management broadly defined. Their responses are paraphrased here, organized by major topic area: Budgeting and Resource Availability; Manage- ment Priorities; Organizational Roles and Responsibilities; Information and Analytic Capabilities; and Performance Measures, Tradeoffs, and Decision Criteria. Budgeting and Resource Availability Edmonton suggested improvements in budgeting practice, and several other agencies focused on the lack of financial, human, and data resources as a major impediment to better asset management practice, particularly for the selected assets. It would help to require improved alignment of capital and oper- ating budgets to infrastructure categories to better assess use of budget. — City of Edmonton Providing resources for these assets is a challenge. There are inadequate financial and staff resources to manage these assets that are sometimes viewed as ancillary to the pavement infra- structure. — Saskatchewan H&T What is needed is dedication of resources to data gathering and maintenance analysis. — Colorado DOT Region 3 If dollars could be assigned to signal poles and mast arms and beacons, conduit, wiring... we could make asset management de- cisions. — Colorado DOT Region 4 There is a concern that the resources needed to establish a com- prehensive asset management program may be better applied to other needed areas. — Iowa DOT Better management is impeded by limited staff and resources to track, report, and maintain these assets. — Kansas DOT The primary institutional issue is that other Departmental prior- ities are using all available resources and then some. Moving on to systematically managing the classes of assets under study in Topic 37-03 is presently beyond the scope of effort that can be sustained by both the affected program areas and our information technology office. We have to wrap up some of the ongoing 128 transportation management system upgrades before starting development of new systems. — NYSDOT There must be a realistic assessment of the resources needed to support a comprehensive asset management program. The concept of “data as an asset” is often skipped, leading to the un- derestimation of data management needs. If, as in PDOT’s case, asset management is an outgrowth of a variety of discontinuous activities (inventory, condition monitoring, financial models, etc.), the process gets “kick-started” and behind on data collection from the start. From there, it is an up-hill battle to acquire quali- fied staff to support the “new” asset management program because the initial belief was that asset management was going to save the agency money. Lacking an initial full assessment of ben- efits and costs of this system impedes the progress of the agency while asset data get older and less credible. — City of Portland There is a lack of perceived need, manpower, and funding to ini- tiate and maintain inventories. — West Virginia DOT Management Priorities Several agencies listed various management issues that affect their organization’s treatment of selected assets, in- cluding a perceived low priority of these assets compared with other management needs, difficulties in translating between focused views of assets (agency “stovepipes”) and more global perspectives of agency priorities, and the lack of an overall asset management approach within the agency. Individual infrastructure elements require individualized analy- ses, causing difficulty in presenting an overall corporate picture to relate one disparate asset to another. — City of Edmonton Organizationally, these assets have been a low priority in com- parison to pavement and bridge management. Highway mainte- nance functions have employed performance measurement methods to assure consistent service levels across the 12 districts and 88 counties. This management process utilizes condition sur- veys and quality assurance reviews to ensure compliance with statewide policies. — Ohio DOT At present, major overarching gaps in knowledge include (1) lack of data defined, collected, and stored in a consistent manner; (2) lack of a global view by individual business lines of organi- zational priorities; and (3) lack of effective analysis tools. — Oregon DOT There is no specific guideline or a written strategy to implement overall asset management in a near future. — Quebec Ministry of Transportation Texas’ large size and overwhelming quantities of inventory make it difficult to manage down to the level of assets such as sidewalks, guardrails, signs, etc. As we develop better manage- ment tools, information will probably be kept in greater detail at the District level (25 Districts in Texas, each averaging 7,600 lane-miles). — Texas DOT

129 Some of these ancillary assets such as culverts, sidewalks, and signs can be tied into other projects such as paving and roadway. That minimizes cost and disruption to the public. For that to hap- pen, however, good advance coordination between the organiza- tional stovepipes is required. (If the coordination is not done early in the process, it becomes “scope creep.”) We need to con- sider all assets associated with and around a project, and we need procedures that encourage that coordination. We have a GIS database of most assets, but need to better utilize it. Far more attention is given to pavement, bridge, and roadway since that is where most expenditures are. Ancillary assets are sometimes lacking a good inventory and condition rating. — Vermont AOT Organizational Roles and Responsibilities The agencies here noted that organizational and human re- source issues, particularly in staffing needed functions in asset management, are impediments to introducing or improving asset management. While mentioned above as a management issue, the lack of a global view by individual business lines of organizational prior- ities is also an organizational issue. — Oregon DOT A gap exists in the area of organizational structure and related Human Resources issues. PDOT needs to properly capture asset management skills in job class descriptions to be able to retain and recruit qualified staff. Asset managers are appointed from different levels of responsibility within the organization. While cross-disciplinary and inter-divisional asset teams have worked well together, asset management as a distinct function is yet to be identified except at the Asset Management Coordinator level. Roles have been defined for Asset Manager and Asset Manage- ment Coordinator, but we have not hired for either function. We have identified a need for field data collection devices and pro- grams/processes to support field data collection. However, we lack the actual capability in this area, which is critical to improving the timeliness and accuracy of basic asset data. — PDOT Asset management is not explicitly part of our planning. No de- partment has been put in charge of implementing asset manage- ment on a defined schedule. — Quebec Ministry of Transportation Information and Analytic Capabilities Agencies cited several gaps and ideas for research involving IT, data collection and processing, and analytic methods and tools. Better tools are needed to conduct tradeoff analyses among asset categories. The issue of setting appropriate service level targets also needs to be looked at more. For example, our agency has a service objective to maintain 98 percent of regulatory signs func- tioning as intended. Is 98 percent an appropriate number? Should it be higher or lower? — Maryland SHA There is no repository where information on these features is accessible. Inventories for these smaller assets are incomplete, are organized so others cannot use them, or are out of date. This is to be rectified in the next 2–3 years. [Note: Refer to the dis- cussion of MDOT’s SPFI initiative earlier in this chapter.] — MDOT We lack a functional database for some of the six selected assets. It is also questionable whether a database is needed. It may not be cost-effective to develop a comprehensive database and monitor- ing system to replace an adequately functioning replacement cycle. — MnDOT NYSDOT has chosen to focus its transportation asset management technology improvement projects in areas other than the asset classes being highlighted in Topic 37-03. (1) The MAMIS project has been a large multi-year system development effort. (2) A High- way Data Management System upgrade has also been ongoing for more than 5 years to cover both the pavement management and traffic monitoring programs. (3) Phase 1 of a bridge inventory and inspection system project was put into production about 18 months ago. Phase 2 of that project is updating the field equipment and data acquisition software used by bridge inspectors. Phase 3 will deal with analysis of investment candidates throughout the main- tenance, preservation, and replacement cycle. (4) New York’s safety management system is being upgraded with high-accuracy statewide base mapping, electronic ticketing, electronic crash records creation, and electronic judicial processing of traffic vio- lations. This has resulted in a much more robust linear referencing system, including connection-details topology. (5) New York has invested heavily in developing an e-government portal for use by our customers who need permits to transport large or heavy loads on highways. The goal of reduced labor costs per permit remains elusive, despite heavy investment in this technology project. (6) NYSDOT is starting a technology project now to update our Artemis 9000 project management application with best-in-class capabilities. The upgraded project management system will continue to interface with our Program Management System that was developed during the 1990s. (7) Congestion management is an important performance measurement and reporting subject in New York. Ongoing investment in the Condition Acquisition and Reporting (CARS) platform, in a pooled fund effort with other states, is a major ongoing Information Technology project. — NYSDOT An inexpensive assessment method using a van with videolog- ging or cameras would be useful. — North Carolina DOT While mentioned above as a management issue, the lack of effective analysis tools is also noted here as an Information Tech- nology issue. — Oregon DOT [While the substance of this comment is noted above as a resource availability matter, it also has data implications and is repeated here.] The concept of “data as an asset” is often skipped, leading to the underestimation of data management needs. If, as in PDOT’s case, asset management is an outgrowth of a variety of discontinuous activities (inventory, condition monitoring, financial models, etc.), the process gets “kick-started” and behind on data collection from the start. — City of Portland Over the years, the Ministry of Transportation has implemented management systems in specifics areas (bridges, pavements, etc.) and inventory systems for all of the assets mentioned in this sur- vey except for roadside signs. These systems could be integrated within a broader vision of asset management with minor adjust- ments, and some inventory or management systems already have

integrated asset management functions. However, there is no specific guideline or written strategy to implement overall asset management in a near future. — Quebec Ministry of Transportation Development of automated condition assessment tools could certainly assist with managing our assets. For instance, sign condition is now a visual measurement, mostly done during the day. Faded or mildewed signs are obvious as well as leaning signs, etc. However, it should be possible to develop, using digital photographic technology, equipment that would count the signs, measure if they are leaning, and also measure retroreflectivity. This would take the subjectivity out of our ratings. — Texas DOT Performance Measures, Tradeoffs, and Decision Criteria Several agencies focused on the need for better information on gauging asset performance and incorporating this concept within decision-support methods, particularly optimization of resource allocation and tradeoff analyses. To optimize resources across asset categories requires that the optimization be based on criteria that can transcend asset cate- gories. Determining appropriate criteria and service level objec- tives is difficult. Research on the entire area of optimization of resources among asset categories from a practitioner’s perspec- tive would be useful. — Maryland SHA The research we are most interested in is how to develop perfor- mance measures for our assets using lowest life-cycle costs. This work is essential to develop meaningful performance targets as we move forward with performance-based planning. — MnDOT NYSDOT is participating in both of the AASHTOware asset management projects that are now starting up. The continuation of NCHRP Project 20-57’s Report 545 with its program-level and project-level tradeoff model development is of keen interest. Similarly, an AASHTOware approach to managing the highway maintenance function holds promise to reduce technology sys- tem development costs for the states. Prioritization of investment candidates across all classes of transportation assets (e.g., guideways, traffic control systems, revenue rolling stock, terminals, etc.) and all program areas (e.g., operations, maintenance, system preservation, service im- provement) requires a common measure of performance on which to sort the candidates into priority order. Development of ranking criteria will be a very tall order, in that the subject mat- ter expert committees that now make the tradeoff decisions rely on extensive knowledge of their assets and performance that is not easily boiled down to an attribute a computer program can use to sort on. — NYSDOT Data collection and data maintenance costs affect the agency’s ability to track selected assets at the individual asset level. The agency has responded by using policies to govern maintenance and replacement cycles. The identification of key business rules, such as cost-effective replacement cycles, may assist agencies to govern effectively. — Ohio DOT 130 Establishment of a rating system that would permit evaluation of cross-category asset conditions and treatment tradeoffs would be useful. — Oregon DOT It would be helpful to know how states are linking these assets to other roadway features and evaluating the overall roadway seg- ment. How do these ancillary assets influence larger project se- lection? — Vermont AOT MATURITY OF ASSET MANAGEMENT Chapters two through seven have described several aspects of the management of selected assets. To put these in the context of asset management, we return to the maturity diagram of Table 1. The state-of-art practices in Table 1 have been con- solidated and listed in the left-hand data column of Table 29. In the right-hand data column of Table 29 are two sets of in- formation: • The current state of practice across all of the selected as- sets, summarized very briefly; and • Potential improvements that could fill the gap between current state of practice and the state of the art. These improvements are also informed by the information in chapters two through seven. Table 29 is greatly simplified because it encompasses all six selected assets, which clearly differ from one another in many ways. Nonetheless, the table is useful to get an idea of how management practices for selected assets compare, for example, with pavement and bridge management in the level of attainment of asset management. Clearly, many gaps need to be filled, echoing comments reported in the synthesis sur- vey and other recent surveys. In certain cases, the concepts of asset management may need to be developed in new ways to accommodate different types of assets, such as electronic controls on traffic signals; systems of assets, such as signal systems or culvert systems, where impacts must be seen more broadly and issues of component compatibility become important; and new ways of combining assets and introduc- ing new classes of assets, as has been proposed in novel con- cepts of peripheral roadway lighting combined with pave- ment markings and embedded roadway lighting. Table 29 should therefore be interpreted as a high-level overview, with the more detailed discussion of each asset in chapters two through seven, respectively. OTHER NON-PAVEMENT, NON-BRIDGE ASSETS Although the six categories of selected assets were the pri- mary focus of this study, examples of innovative management methods for other non-pavement, non-bridge assets that were identified during the course of the work were noted as well. Several examples have already been cited in the discussion of comprehensive asset management approaches. A further ex- ample is a guardrail inventory management system developed

131 Aspect of Infrastructure Management State-of-the-Art Asset Management State of Practice Across Selected Assets and Potential Improvements in Practice Policy Guidance Guidance moves beyond ìwish lists ” to provide clear governmental priorities among competing goals, objectives, and initiatives. Long-range planning, agency strategic planning, and decisions on program funding and resource allocation are fully integrated horizontally (across agency units) and vertically (top management, managerial, and technical levels) under the umbrella of this guidance. Human factors understanding of asset performance requirements extend to different population groups. Public outreach extends to identifying governmental priorities at a broad program level. STATE OF PRACTICE Technical guidance on asset construction or installation exists across all assets. Maintenance and operation guidelines exist to some degree at national level, more typically at agency level. Human factors guidance is beginning to emerge (e.g., regarding pedestrians), but more is needed. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS More performance-based guidance; e.g., relating retroreflectivity levels to crashes and culvert condition to risk of road failure. To the extent feasible, greater standardization in critical performance thresholds and criteria, test procedures, and component compatibility requirements. Asset Life-Cycle Focus Project decisions are based on maximization of life-cycle benefits or minimization of life-cycle costs, plus consideration of other (nonquantitative) impacts. Life-cycle impacts to the public are considered in decisions on management options. The life-cycle framework enables analysis of certain tradeoffs (e.g., capital-maintenance, benefits-to-costs). STATE OF PRACTICE Examples of life-cycle cost analysis (LCCA) have been developed for specific assets, components, and materials. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Incorporation of public benefits or impacts within the LCCA framework. More definitive and reliable data to support LCCA. Incorporation of LCCA within decision-support tools. Asset Performance and Costs Causal factors affecting asset deterioration are reasonably well understood based on published research and agency’s own experience. Models can predict deterioration of assets, needs for treatments, associated costs, and improvement in asset condition or extension of service life. These models are incorporated within life-cycle decision-support systems or tools. Resulting information on asset performance and cost can be easily processed or summarized for use by different agency organizational units and levels, as well as for external accountability reporting and public information. Management systems are applied to identify strategies for attaining performance targets within available resources. Asset performance is understood throughout the agency organization and by executive and legislative stakeholders. STATE OF PRACTICE Significant work has been done in certain assets to understand performance of different materials or components. Variability in site-specific conditions and in performance data to date has precluded development of reliable performance or deterioration models. Difficulties in reliably measuring condition also have inhibited a more analytic approach to performance. National retroreflectivity calibration standard may improve reliability of sign and pavement marking readings. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS More rapid and reliable measurement and data collection techniques. Development of practical, reliable methods to predict service life, accounting for site- or system-specific factors, but avoiding complicated requirements in each individual calculation. Development of more robust analytic tools or management systems, perhaps guided by a user- community panel. Broader concept of asset performance, encompassing electric/electronic systems, real-time operational changes, and component compatibility issues. Understanding of performance at a network or system level (e.g., hydrological performance of a culvert network, performance of a signal system, performance of combinations of assets; e.g., signals, signs, lighting, and pavement markings). TABLE 29 COMPARISON: STATE OF THE ART AND STATE OF PRACTICE (continued)

132 Aspect of Infrastructure Management State-of-the-Art Asset Manage me nt State of Practice Across Selected Assets and Potential Im prove me nts in Practice Im pacts of Asset Perform ance Agency has attained or acquired a body of research on im pacts of asset perform ance in different situations, clim ates, road classes, etc. Predictive m odels of im pacts are fully incorporated in life- cycle procedures to optim ize decisions on construction, rehabilitation, and maintenance. STATE OF PRACTICE Im pacts are understood qualitatively, and research has contributed to an analytic understanding in so me cases. Complexity of problem can lead to apparent inconsistencies in actual versus predicted results. Im pact m odels by and large have not yet been incorporated within LCCA or management systems. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Additional research to clarify im pacts in different site situations and am ong different population groups. A greater focus on system -level im pacts (e.g., effects of signal system s as opposed to individual signalized intersections; im pacts of a system s approach that co mb ines lighting, pavement markings, signs, and signals; hydrological and water quality im pacts of a culvert drainage network). Resource Allocation, Budgeting, and Project Selection Budget developm ent conform s to applicable law, funding eligibility, and agency planning and programming guidelines. Program development is built on an explicit relationship between proposed budget and target level of service or perform ance, with im plications for achieving defined policy objectives . Ranking or prioritization criteria are closely aligned with policy objectives and perform ance targets. Cross-progra m tradeoffs are explicitly considered, in addition to prioritization of projects within each progra m. Level of service considers custom er needs and perceptions, in addition to other public-policy and agency priorities. Resource allocation and budgeting process is fully vertically aligned, with project prioritization criteria, tradeoff analyses, and perform ance m easures and targets in full agreem ent with policy goals and objectives. Devices such as GIS-based ma ps and dashboards are used to co mm unicate budget results and progra m impacts to stakeholders and the public. Budgeting results and forecast progra m im pacts are co mm unicated to stakeholders and the public. STATE OF PRACTICE Providing financial and staff resources can be challenging. Selected assets are viewed in so me agencies as secondary to the pave me nt infrastructure. Budgeting relies to so me degree on asset inventory, condition, or level of service, but perform ance-based factors are not the pri ma ry drivers. Other factors (prior year’s budget, staff judgment, public comments and co mp laints, and political inputs) play an im portant role. Lack of basic inventory and related asset inform ation in ma ny U.S. agencies precludes mo re advanced budgeting techniques. International agencies are ahead in having information on asset performance and use of prioritization and tradeoff analyses. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Strengthened budgeting and resource allocation will require im prove me nts in data collection, analytic tool developm ent, and organizational processes described in other ite ms . Existing or easily developed tools (e.g., GIS, dashboards) can be developed to co mm unicate asset perform ance, costs, and proposed im prove me nts. Organization Cross-functional asset ma nage me nt responsibility exists, briefs top ma nage me nt on status Recognition and co mmitm ent to sustainable ma nage me nt of assets am ong em ployees, ma nage me nt, and elected officials. Asset ma nager role within the agency is explicitly recognized and assigned, and asset ma nage me nt training occurs regularly and reaches all em ployees, ma nagers, and elected officials. Succession planning takes into account the role of asset ma nagers. STATE OF PRACTICE So me reporting organizations did not have a defined individual responsible for asset ma nage me nt. It is not clear to what degree sustainable ma nage me nt and cross- functional co mm unication are practiced. International agencies provide exam ples of different organizational structures. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Continue prom oting asset ma nage me nt as an effective business process applicable to selected assets. Communicate international experience more widely, including different organizational models. Perform ance Measure me nt Body of perform ance m easures is well established and incorporated in business and decision processes as the basis for accountability reporting internally and externally, and to support policy form ulation, prioritization and tradeoff analyses, resource allocation, and public feedback. Measures are expressed in various form s for different audiences, including reports, trend lines, dashboards, ma ps, and other devices. STATE OF PRACTICE Most agencies have data on physical condition of selected assets, with other me asures as appropriate to each asset. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Strengthened perform ance me asures based on improvements in measurement, data collection, and analytic tools. Perform ance m easures based on im pacts of asset perform ance as well as asset condition. TABLE 29 (continued) (continued)

133 by the Idaho Transportation Department. This system, re- ferred to as “Grail,” relies on an automated videologging sys- tem. A vehicle traveling at normal highway speed obtains high-quality digital photo images of guardrail conditions, combined with GPS location, road curvature, and distance- traveled data for use with GIS and traffic-related applications. The system helps the department managers identify damaged or obsolete guardrail sections on Interstate and National High- way System highways that can affect motorist safety. More- over, this system enables Idaho Transportation Department managers to maintain a complete and accurate guardrail inventory with very efficient use of resources (Transportation Asset Management System . . . 2005). Synthesis survey participants were also asked to identify other non-pavement, non-bridge assets that they manage using estimates of service life and predictions of future con- dition and resource needs. Following are their comments: Infrastructure inventory data [are] collected on an annual basis for all the assets owned and managed by the city of Edmonton. The infrastructure elements include drainage (sanitary, storm and com- bined sewers, and wastewater treatment), road right-of-way (road, sidewalks, bridges), parks, transit, fleet, buildings, traffic control, recreations facilities, affordable housing, waste management, tech- nology equipment, and other (library material, emergency re- sponse equipment, etc.). Essential information collected for these assets includes quantity, unit of measure, replacement value, average age and expected life, and condition assessment in three categories: physical condition, demand/capacity, and functionality. In addition, financial information is collected for each of these infrastructure elements showing investment needs through the next 10 years and whether categorized as a growth, rehabili- tation, or other project. The city is also implementing an innov- ative prioritization tool as described in the earlier section on ongoing asset management efforts. — City of Edmonton Ohio employs asset management techniques in its management of transportation buildings, waste treatment, and other long-term facilities. Performance measures are also used to monitor each of our critical functions through the Organizational Performance Index. This collection of performance measures tracks results, including various condition levels and work programs at the district level. These indicators are in turn used by managers to identify and support funding or process improvement needs. — Ohio DOT Other agencies mentioned their management of facilities such as rest areas (Minnesota and Texas) and picnic areas (Texas). Aspect of Infrastructure Management State-of-the-Art Asset Manage me nt State of Practice Across Selected Assets and Potential Im prove me nts in Practice Inform ation Technology and Data Collection and Processing Models and engineering relationships discussed in previous items have evolved to sophisticated management systems, incorporating engineering and economic models, life-cycle concepts, and decision-support procedures (e.g., optim ization, heuristics, decision rules, or trees). Asset ma nage me nt system s are organized on an integrating platform (e.g., GIS or web-based portals) for internal and possibly external access to inform ation. The agency ma intains co mp lete, current, and accurate data on asset inventory, condition, perform ance, cost, and work acco mp lishm ent. Data are updated on a predeter mi ned schedule or by established criteria. Sa mp ling techniques may also be em ployed. There is an appropriate mi x of data collection technology (e.g., visual, physical, automated measurement, and remote sensing) to ensure high-quality data and cost-effective coverage. Data supporting infrastructure asset ma nage me nt are fully integrated within a unified scheme; e.g., through data warehousing. Inform ation on custom er perceptions is updated regularly through surveys, focus groups, complaint tracking, or other met hods. STATE OF PRACTICE Agencies collect data on asset condition generally on a regular basis, with increasing use of auto ma tion. State of practice in analytic m odeling varies widely, ranging from well-developed databases, tools, and system s to lack of basic inventory and expenditure information. Economic analyses tend to be stand-alone applications, typically not integrated in a ma nage me nt system. Where ma nage me nt system s are applied, they are likely ma intenance management applications, which tend to be focused on current condition and project targets and budgets in the short term . Other existing tools are on a variety of platform s, and do not have standardized com ponents or capabilities. Several agencies have asset ma nage me nt system s underway for selected assets. Research groups have applied simulation to understanding the perform ance of selected assets, but care is needed to include all effects that occur in co mp licated field situations. POTENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS Better analytic tools require engineering and economic m odeling of perform ance and im pacts (discussed earlier), and need to be tailored to individual assets as well as the nature of the selected asset system , as discussed previously. Where ma intenance ma nage me nt system s are used, need to overcome shortcomings (e.g., lack of inventory, short- term analysis horizon) and provide life-cycle comparisons of different mate rials or system options. Incorporate mo re sophisticated hum an factors aspects within mo re robust si mu lation techniques, analytic tools, and ma nage me nt system s. TABLE 29 (continued)