Transportation Asset Management Webinar Series Webinar 36 Preliminary Findings from Initial TAMP Assessment Sponsored by FHWA and AASHTO Webinar 36 – February 13, 2018
FHWA-AASHTO Asset Management Webinar Series • This is the 36 th in a webinar series that has been running since 2012 • Webinars are held every two months, on topics such as off- system assets, asset management plans, asset management and risk management, and more • We welcome ideas for future webinar topics and presentations • Submit your questions using the webinar’s Q&A feature 1
Review of the Initial TAMPs Initial TAMP Complete TAMP Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 2018 2019 Today 2
Learning Objectives – Introduce the key findings of the review of initial TAMPs – Highlight some of the opportunities for improvement in preparing final TAMPs – Share your questions on this process – SHARE LESSONS LEARNED, IDEAS, KNOWLEDGE!!! 3
Webinar Agenda 2:00 Webinar Introduction and Project Objectives Steve Gaj (FHWA) Hyun-A Park (Spy Pond Partners, LLC) 2:10 Overview of Project and Initial Findings Shobna Varma (StarIsis Corporation) 2:40 Areas of Future Focus Gordon Proctor (Proctor Associates) 3:10 Q&A and Wrap Up 4
Welcome • FHWA and the AASHTO Sub-Committee on Asset Management are pleased to sponsor this webinar • Sharing knowledge is a critical component of advancing asset management practice 5
Project Objectives • Assist State DOTs to enhance their initial risk-based asset management plans – Processes used to address the minimum plan contents could vary from one State to another – This variation could provide an enormous opportunity to advance the state of practice • The FHWA is taking advantage of this rare opportunity by identifying best practices ....and identifying the areas that could improve through additional guidance – Technical support and best practice case studies also will be provided 6
What this Project Does Not Do • It does not influence plan certification or consistency determinations – Those remain with FHWA divisions • All plans reviewed were already certified • This project will not influence consistency reviews 7
Project Overview and Initial Findings Shobna Varma Star i sis Corporation 5
The Review Process • Reviews are partially based upon the asset management regulation 23 CFR Sec. 515 • Deconstructed the regulation into 95 separate issues or questions • 42 of them reflect the minimum requirements • The remaining 53 represent the “should” or advanced practices • In the advanced practices, we looked particularly for evidence that the TAM practice influenced decisions, investments, or processes 6
The Review Process • Any process not in the TAMP was not reviewed • Good practices exist outside the TAMP but if so they are not captured in this review • Only what is in the TAMP was considered 7
Highlights from the Initial TAMPs 8
Highlights (continued) • Widespread understanding of asset management • Ability to document a return on investment using asset management • Life-cycle strategies apparent in many TAMPs • State of good repair often identified • Condition gaps and trends clearly illustrated • Modeling demonstrates future outcomes of current actions • Risks are acknowledged 9
Widespread Understanding • TAMPs expressed a good understanding of asset “ intends to incorporate life cycle planning to shift the management focus from “worst-first” • Described as a methodology to strategic preservation, to avoid or comprehensive delay major rehabilitation process to manage and replacement costs.” assets for a - One example statement reasonable life-cycle costs 10
Documenting ROI • Some TAMPs quantified the benefits generated by asset management . 11
Right Treatments, Right Time 12
LCP Sentiment • The objective is to minimize the life cycle cost of the infrastructure while maximizing its value with constrained fiscal funding. - A state asset management plan 13
Monitoring the Implementation of the LCP • Set targets • Model optimum program • Districts select projects from model program • Project delivery tracked • Results compared to model recommendations 14
Value of Preservation 15
LCP Benefits Documented • One state estimates more than $150,000 in annual savings per bridge with a life-cycle approach • Annual cost under an LCP approach is $366,000 compared to $507,000 under a worst-first approach 16
State’s LCP Savings • LCP reduces backlog by 53% compared to worst- first 17
LCP Benefits Documented 18
Bridge LCP Benefits • % Poor bridges to be reduced 47% more than in worst-first scenario 19
Modeled LCP Treatments 20
TAM Ingrained in Policies, Structures • Objective A: Sustain a Desired State of Good Repair over the Life Cycle of Assets • Objective B: Achieve the Lowest Practical Life-Cycle Cost for Assets • Finalize and implement asset inventories, condition assessments and corridor management and develop short and long-range asset management funding strategies (AMFS) for each asset type to minimize life-cycle costs. • Annually develop Resource Allocation Goals (RAGS) on a network-level basis, consider benefits and risks of each asset type and balance with the AMFS. 21
TAM Structures, Policies • Some noted new organizational structures, policies • TAM coordinating councils • Enhanced data policies, structures • Ties to performance management 22
Shortfalls Clarified 23
Explaining Inventories, Trends State NHS Bridge Trends 25% 20.9% 20.9% 18.0% 18.3% 18.8% 19.6% 19.1% 20% 18.2% 17.7% 17.1% 15.4% 15% 13.6% 11.7% 10.2% 9.0% 8.2% 10% 7.1% 6.5% 5% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 24
Forecasting Gaps 25
Sustainability Indices Used • Pavement assets depreciate at 2.0 percent per year. The average investment was below 1.0 percent of current value—less than the level that is required to maintain pavements at the desired state of good repair. 26
Future Sustainability Ratios • Asset Sustainability Ratio (ASR) indicates the replenishment of useful life relative to its consumption. • The Asset Sustainability Ratio can also be expressed as the dollar amount invested to the total depreciated value over a time period. • Remaining Service Life (RSL) is often communicated as the percentage of the remaining useful life of an asset relative to the expected useful life. • The Deferred Preservation Liability (DPL) is the estimated cost to perform all past-due preservation or rehabilitation work in order to manage the network in a State of Good Repair. 27
Modeling Consequences 28
Implementing BrM for LCP Deck Decision Tree 29
Risks Acknowledged • TAMPs warned of highest risks • Inflation • Funding • Climate • Political sentiment 30
At-Risk Assets Noted • 50% of concrete pavement structures - more than 40 years old (1,000 lane miles) • 246 bridges that are 80 years old or older • 23 scour-critical bridges need mitigation • Lane miles on the verge of rapid deterioration • Decks more than 20 years old 31
In Conclusion • Overall good understanding of asset management • States are looking at return on investment using asset management • Life-cycle strategies apparent in many TAMPs • State of good repair often identified • Condition gaps and trends clearly illustrated • Modeling used to reflect future outcomes of current actions • Future condition based on asset management versus “worst first” strategies • Risks are acknowledged 32
Areas of Future Focus Gordon Proctor Gordon Proctor & Associates 33
Incomplete List of Future Focus Areas • By no means exhaustive list but initially • Management systems, particularly for bridges • Programming unconnected to TAM • Work types unclear • Risk management not integrated • Extreme events not integrated • Asset valuation not catalytic • Local NHS coordination is a work in progress 34
Management Systems • Some robust, • Others only under mature development • Used to estimate • Some said will be program needs, 2020 or later before forecast gaps are operational • BMS particularly rare for modeling, scenarios 35
Management System Summary • TAMPs that say they have fully compliant pavement 26 management systems or which appear to have • TAMPs that say they have fully compliant bridge 11 management system or which appear to have 36
Link to Programming Unclear • Some TAMPs showed line-of-sight link to programming • Others • Said districts pick projects on local priorities • Several still rely on historical program splits • Several just didn’t say how programming decisions were made 37
Unclear Work Types • Many lack details on investments in • Initial construction • Maintenance • Preservation • Rehabilitation • Replacement • Single line items for pavements, bridges didn’t split out treatment amounts 38
Recommend
More recommend
