This ICR is
approved on the understanding that the questionnaire instrument
will include: (1) the average time to respond and (2) a statement
of the consequences of the failure to display a currently valid
control number.
Inventory as of this Action
Requested
Previously Approved
05/31/2010
36 Months From Approved
52
0
0
69
0
0
0
0
0
In June 2004, the National Cooperative
Highway Research Program (NCHRP) released the Mechanistic-Empirical
Pavement Design Guide (MEPDG) for New and Rehabilitated Pavement
Structures. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) organized a
Design Guide Implementation Team (DGIT) to immediately begin the
process of informing, educating, and assisting the FHWAs field
offices, State highway agencies, industry, and others about the new
design guide. The MEPDG represents a significant advancement in
pavement design and includes the best available engineering theory
and mechanistic principles to determine both the structural
response and predict performance over the lifetime of a pavement
structure. The MEPDG can be considered a 40-year step forward in
pavement design. The MEPDG is a more theoretical and
mathematical-based procedure, strongly bolstered by fundamental
engineering principles. The MEPDG is readily useful to academia,
researchers, and practitioners of pavement analysis and design.
Implementation of the MEPDG will require a significant amount of
time, resources and funding. However, the adoption of the guide has
the potential for providing a substantial long term savings based
on the shear magnitude of annual expenditures for highway
pavements. In 2003, over 79 billion dollars was used for highway
purposes (Highway Statistics 2003, FHWA). Any improvement in the
designs will have a significant implication in reducing costs to
maintain these pavements and more than offset the resources
required to implement the new pavement design guide. Moving towards
a mechanistic-empirical design process represents a paradigm shift
for the majority of states and will require a significant amount of
education, training, new equipment, new testing requirements and
data collection. Most importantly it will require better
communication and coordination between the designers, materials
engineers, traffic engineers and consultants to collect and
maintain the data needed to optimize the pavement designs and
continue to validate and calibrate the models in the guide. The
DGIT is focused on being a leader in this effort; providing
Education, Enhancement, and Implementation activities to the
Transportation Community. The information collected in this survey
is a major component of these efforts. These efforts are being
conducted in partnership with the National Cooperative Research
Program (NCHRP) and the American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) through the formation of a MEPDG
Lead States Group. AASHTO has representation by all the STAs,
including Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia. AASHTO serves
to meet STA needs in terms of evaluation and adoption of laboratory
test protocols, experimental procedure and design procedures. The
Lead States Group consists of 19 states that are making efforts
toward MEPDG implementation and serving in a leadership role for
other states who are considering implementation. The FHWA considers
implementation of mechanistic-empirical pavement design a critical
element in improving the National Highway System. It ties directly
into objectives listed in SAFETEA-LU section 1503, which supports
longer life pavements. The MEPDG has the potential to increase the
life span of pavement networks through better engineering design
and will therefore delay future pavement rehabilitation. This
increase in pavement life will make the roadways safer to the
public through reduced construction, reduced congestion due to
construction, and increased mobility
On behalf of this Federal agency, I certify that
the collection of information encompassed by this request complies
with 5 CFR 1320.9 and the related provisions of 5 CFR
1320.8(b)(3).
The following is a summary of the topics, regarding
the proposed collection of information, that the certification
covers:
(i) Why the information is being collected;
(ii) Use of information;
(iii) Burden estimate;
(iv) Nature of response (voluntary, required for a
benefit, or mandatory);
(v) Nature and extent of confidentiality; and
(vi) Need to display currently valid OMB control
number;
If you are unable to certify compliance with any of
these provisions, identify the item by leaving the box unchecked
and explain the reason in the Supporting Statement.
SS jan 11 2007.doc
Questionnaire