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.
table that charts list comparision
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 FHWAÂs 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